Part One: Situation Definition
Kristen Houser, from the National Sexual Violence Resource Center and Pennsylvania Coalition Against Rape, presented “Words Matter: How Language, Context, and Content Can Perpetuate or Change Public Bias About Sexual Violence.” Two main issues discussed in Houser’s presentation that brought me intense ethical messages were identifying a sexual assault victim, specifically minors, and the words chosen to describe these incidents.
I do not believe a sexual assault victim should ever be identified in the news, especially if that victim is a minor because it will only cause more harm to the individual. As a journalist, my “first loyalty is to [the] citizens,” and I must strive to “minimize harm” cast upon them (Foreman, 2016). Lisa M Jones, David Finkelhor and Jessica Beckwith from the University of New Hampshire wrote an article titled “Protecting Victims’ Identities in Press Coverage of Child Victimization.” The article detailed many important points about the danger the media can pose on a child’s recovering efforts, and some of the long-term consequences associated with being labeled as a victim.
Additionally, I believe it is important to understand the power of word choice when reporting on sexual assaults, and understand its potentially negative impact on the victim. Kristen Houser provided some examples in her presentation that raised some concerns about word choice, and ultimately brought me intense ethical messages. As a future journalist myself, it is important to understand how damaging words can be to a person’s reputation and self-confidence. Sexual assault victims are already suffering from great distress, and seeing a headline that reads “rape accuser” can misinform the audience, or cause more harm to the victim.
Gene Foreman, author of The Ethical Journalist: Making Responsible Choices in the Digital Age, lists four ethical codes from the Society of Professional Journalists. One is to “minimize harm,” which is very important when reporting on sexual assault stories. In relation to the two situations mentioned above, I find it more valuable to “minimize harm” than to “seek truth and report it,” especially when reporting on a sexual assault case.
Part Two: Analysis
The first example of why it is important to exclude a minor’s name is because of the opportunity for the public to cast blame on that individual, who is already suffering from the traumatic event. Jones, Finkelhor, and Beckwith note that “one study found that the greater the number of people who were told about the rape, the greater the likelihood that the victim received messages of blame or hostility” (Jones, Finkelhor, and Beckwith, 2010). In addition, it is also noted that the public “often perceive rape victims as partially responsible for the assault,” which ultimately hinders the victim’s ability to recover in a timely manner (Jones, Finkelhor, and Beckwith, 2010). As a journalist, an ethical one who strongly supports the SPJ’s code “minimize harm,” it would be morally wrong to include a minor’s name knowing the psychological and long-term impact it would have on the victim.
Foreman notes in his book, “a common practice in journalism is to withhold the names of victims of sex crimes,” which further supports my reasoning to not include this information (Foreman, 2016). By violating this norm, the reporter-audience relationship can be negatively impacted. Jones, Finkelhor, and Beckwith said that “victims are very concerned about the possibility that their private trauma may be broadcast publicly,” and thus “fewer victims will come forward to get help at all.” Therefore, it would be more harmful to the victims and those trying to seek help if they know their names will be published on the front page of newspaper or their stories shared on the six o’clock news. With this in mind, it once again proves to be unethical to publish a victim’s name as it clearly violates the SPJ’s Code of Ethics and journalism norms.
In addition, a journalist should always be aware of the impact his words can have on stakeholders. Words can be interpreted in a variety of ways, and can cause more harm than originally intended. In relation to sexual assault cases, words like ‘accuser’ puts the alleged victim in the role of aggressor and the alleged perpetrator in to the position of victim of that accusation” (Houser, Personal Communication, February 28, 2018). Expressions like “the woman reported…” or “the woman alleges…” are more acceptable and less harmful when reporting on a sexual assault accusation (Houser, Personal Communication, February 28, 2018). Houser explained how the word “accuser” can sometimes lead to victim blaming, and ultimately inflict more harm on the victim. Though it appears simple, word choice can sometimes convey ethically wrong notions, and thus violate of the SPJ’s code to “minimize harm.”
Additionally, Barbara Barnett, from the University of Kansas, wrote an article titled “How Newspapers Frame Rape Allegations: The Duke University Case.” Barnett examines the words reporters use in their articles, how those words are sometimes harmful to the individuals involved, and can then prevent others from coming forward in fear of being labeled. Barnett notes that “women who report rape are portrayed in news stories in dichotomous terms—as innocent and victimized or as wanton and deserving,” and “male perpetrators of sex crimes, meanwhile, are regarded as sex fiends or sex beasts” (Barnett, 2012). Men and women, therefore, are misrepresented in the media, and it ultimately “sustains rape myths” (Barnett, 2012). Evidently, misuse of words do have an impact on the stakeholders, and is therefore an ethical concern all journalists should be mindful of when reporting.
When facing a similar challenge, I agree with a counter argument that was made by Jones, Finkelhor, and Beckwith. The three authors mention how news outlets should try to work on a case-by-case basis. Additionally, it is stated that “in the case where a child is sexually assaulted by her father, who happens to be a teacher, one can certainly imagine that the need is considerable for the community to know that a local official, with access to other children, is a potential sex offender,” the public has a right to know for its own protection (Jones, Finkelhor, and Beckwith, 2010). It is important to consider the SPJ Code of Ethics’ effort to “seek truth and report it” as equally important as its “minimize harm” code, even though they two codes seem counterproductive sometimes (Foreman, 2016). Nevertheless, however, it is a journalist’s duty to inform the public, and sometimes the public’s need for information can outweigh the potential harmful consequences, a conclusion that can be reached through an ends-based thinking process (Foreman, 2016).
Additionally, Houser provided a number of useful alternatives on how to protect a victim’s, especially a minor’s, privacy. One suggestion Houser made was quoted from the AP Stylebook regarding a juvenile’s identity. Houser noted that “privacy means reporters ‘do not identify juveniles (under 18),’” and some of those identifications included “in text or through images”. Furthermore, Houser continued to cite the AP Stylebook that suggested “[having] policies on this issue and [being] sure the entire staff is knowledgeable about the policies.” In the horrible event that a child is assaulted, it is better to be prepared for how to report than scramble to make a poor decision that could potentially harm the victim even more.
Part Three: Conclusion
Throughout my research about reporting on sexual assault cases as well as attending Kristen Houser’s speech, I have learned how incredibly powerful my role as a journalist is. Houser challenged me to not only think harder about which words I choose to include in an article, but more importantly to think smarter about which words I choose. With the many examples Houser listed and a few I found throughout my own personal research, I began to understand how critical my words can be when reporting, not only for the story but the individual.
The momentum behind the #MeToo movement is only continuing to grow, and therefore the importance to properly report on sexual assault cases is becoming more valuable than ever. Whether it is reporting on a high-profile celebrity assaulted by a director, or a local teenager who was raped in a dark alley, fairly and unbiasedly reporting on these cases will protect individuals who are already suffering from the physical and mental trauma associated with being sexually assaulted. As the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics emphasizes a journalist’s obligation to “minimize harm” to its subjects and readers, every journalist should strive to embody this code, especially when reporting on such a sensitive topic like sexual assault.
Part Four: References
Barnett, B. (2012). How Newspapers Frame Rape Allegations: The Duke University Case. Women & Language, 35(2), 11-33.
Foreman, G. (2016). The Ethical Journalist: Making Responsible Decisions in the Digital Age. Hoboken: Wiley.
Jones, L. M., Finkelhor, D., & Beckwith, J. (2010). Protecting Victims’ Identities in Press Coverage of Child Victimization. Journalism, 11(3), 347-367. doi:10.1177/1464884909360925