Situation Definition
Journalist Julie K. Brown, of the Miami Herald, spoke at the Schwab Auditorium here at Penn State on October 23. She came to the school to speak about her work in regards to the Jeffrey Epstein case, which she had followed for years but wrote a 2018 article titled ‘How a future Trump Cabinet member gave a serial sex abuser the deal of a lifetime’. Two takeaways I had from this conference was the dilemma of protecting the identity of victims of sexual violence and the importance of letting the public know the truth, even if it uncomfortable.
Analysis
When Brown was creating her story and gathering information, she always had the intention of support for the victims of the sexual abuse. She noted that it was important to her story that she include the names of the victims yet she had to find a way to do this without causing the victims more harm. In order to produce her story and effectively portray her findings, Brown described the experience of the victims, rather than their identities. The journalist went on to speak about the fact that it is a reporters job to be honest and provide the public with information. Only the most well-trained journalists are able to create a story on a case like this that abides those rules.
The concept of victim identity protection is not only for the women abused int he Epstein case. As we know, all ages are at risk to be abused. In cases with younger children, sexual violence is covered differently. According to a research study performed by three authors from the University of New Hampshire, a lot of information about children is released. According to the journal, “In 4 percent of articles, the child’s street name or address was included. In 21 percent of articles the name of the child’s school, daycare or church was reported… At least one of the above victim identifiers was included in 37 percent of the articles covering child sexual victimization” (Jones, 2010).
When speaking about a case as big as the Epstein one, Julie Brown thought it was important to release the information even if she did not know the consequences. Epstein was an extremely rich and powerful man, tied to government people and many others in the private sector. Brown discussed that she knew all of this beforehand yet decided to publish the story in order to allow for others to know the truth. She believed it was fair to the victims because the story was about bringing someone to justice, not to garner clicks. As a result of her reporting, the public was informed on the reality of what was happening to multiple women which had gone under the radar for years.
I would categorize Julie Brown as a whistleblower, someone who exposes information or activity that is illegal or unethical within an organization. By releasing this information, Brown was putting not only her career at risk, but her personal life as well. It takes bravery to publish a story as serious as this one and I commend Julie Brown for doing so. A case study performed by two British professors at Cardiff University provided evidence for the good that comes from whistleblowing. Whistleblowing always gets the highest amount of attention and scrutiny in the media but yields the most important of information. According to the case study, “[T]his neglected area of journalistic accountability represents a significant opportunity for story-telling which uses the examples of heroic individuals to expose institutional wrongdoing” (Wahl-Jorgensen, 2012). Brown’s story of the Epstein case is a perfect example of someone using whistleblowing to their advantage. By uncovering this scandal, the public was able to realize some issues that most Americans don’t think about on a daily basis. Her reporting helped to reveal that.
Conclusion
When most people think about the hardest part of a reporter’s job, they talk about the deadlines or the fear of writer’s block. After walking out of the conference, I was able to think critically about how I would handle a situation like the Epstein case. There is always a way to report on a case, even if that case involves sexual abuse. There is always a way to report on a sexual abuse story without releasing the victim’s identity. Sometimes a story can be better portrayed by an experience rather than a list of names.
Oftentimes, people will not stand up to those in power in fear of repercussions. As a result, situations like with Jeffrey Epstein can happen and go unnoticed for years. All it takes is one person to speak about a story, to bring it into the public, in order for a resolution to take place. Julie Brown was brave in publishing her story, knowing that the content of her reporting would have consequences. However, the journalist advised everyone in Schwab Auditorium that no matter the consequences, no matter the backlash, it is always right to speak up when something is of importance to the public.
Sources
Jones, L. M., Finkelhor, D., & Beckwith, J. (2010). Protecting victims’ identities in press coverage of child victimization. Journalism: Theory, Practice & Criticism, 11(3), 347–367. doi: 10.1177/1464884909360925
Wahl-Jorgensen, K., & Hunt, J. (2012). Journalism, accountability and the possibilities for structural critique: A case study of coverage of whistleblowing. Journalism: Theory, Practice & Criticism, 13(4), 399–416. doi: 10.1177/1464884912439135