New Yorker Raises Questions About Vicky Ward’s Epstein Work

Vicky Ward: The Epstein writer and Ghislaine Maxwell associate, Vicky Ward, has been called a lot of things. “Presstitute”, “Vulture” and Maxwell’s “BFF”, claims denied by the English podcaster.

But now, she may be able to add “zero credibility” to that list. An assessment she flat-out denies.

A New Yorker piece is today raising questions about the accuracy of Ward’s work on the Jeffrey Epstein case, specifically her new podcast Chasing Ghislaine.

(Writer’s note: We have a history of disharmony with Ward since Ghislaine Maxwell’s trial)

Ward (left) with novelist Lucia Osborne-Crowley, outside the Maxwell trial

On her podcast, Vicky Ward claims to have insider knowledge about Epstein and Maxwell that no other journalist does.

Firstly, the New Yorker piece paints a very different picture, suggesting that Ward may have changed her timelines and misrepresented key points in order to sell content and get attention.

Moreover, the survivors of Jeffrey Epstein & Ghislaine Maxwell have long taken issue with Vicky Ward’s reporting of the Epstein case.

“I am horrified. Just leave us alone! Can’t she make money off of other victims? She’s a ‘presstitute’ and vulture … She won’t stop torturing us, and it is hurting so badly. Whenever we hear the name ‘Vicky Ward,’ we cringe,” survivor Maria Farmer told Page Six ahead of Ward’s podcast premiere.

In her podcast, Ward is portrayed as a woman on a mission, who has been trying to expose Epstein since she first heard about him in 2002.

But her reporting on survivors such as Maria Farmer, her sister Annie, and others has come under fire over the past few years.

In my opinion, Vicky Ward persistently has the weirdest takes on the Epstein case.

Vicky Ward
2011 post written by Ward
Vicky Ward

Serious accusations about professionalism were raised in the New Yorker piece, primarily about the accuracy of Ward’s Epstein work.

Who is Ms Ward? Is she friends with Ghislaine Maxwell?

Furthermore, questions remain about her impartiality and professionalism.

Ward’s former Vanity Fair boss Graydon Carter had this to say about Ward: “he told me that the decision not to run the Farmers’ allegations was likely influenced by Ward’s professional reputation: “My staff, to a person, did not trust her.” I spoke to numerous people who played some role in the production of Ward’s article, which for such a story always includes fact checkers, editors, and lawyers. None felt able to go on the record to discuss the magazine’s handling of the piece, but several said that Ward had not gathered evidence that would stand up in court, and others echoed Carter’s remarks about Ward’s journalism. “Vicky had zero credibility with the fact-checking and legal departments,” one person who worked at Vanity Fair at the time told me. “They had too many bad experiences.” Another then staffer said that Ward had provided inaccurate quotations and had had disputes with sources about when they were speaking on the record. A third person, who worked extensively with both Ward and Carter, told me that he thought Vanity Fair could have done more to pursue the Farmers’ allegations, but also that Ward seemed not to understand “basic journalistic rules.”

Source: The New Yorker

(A spokesperson for the company who commissioned her podcast, Amazon’s Audible, said that the podcast “reflects Ward’s rigorous journalistic investigation as well as her personal recollections of her personal experiences.”)

Ward is defending her work against the claims and believes she is a victim of sexism.

The fact is the Epstein survivors deserve peace of mind. They have been through enough and a podcast produced by Ward is seen as a direct affront to their lived experiences.

We believe her podcast should be removed, at least temporarily, so Audible can investigate the claims made in The New Yorker.

Finally, there are things more important than money, like intergrity, Amazon/Audible.

More trouble with the media

Leave a Reply