×

The names we don’t name, and why

My regular readers are aware of my abhorrence of the overuse of anonymous sources, and are aware that we name names here at The News.

But there are exceptions to that rule.

We don’t name alleged or confirmed victims of sexual abuse unless the victim grants permission to do so.

That is the standard at every media outlet in the country with any sort of moral compass.

During the Lansing State Journal’s coverage of the Larry Nassar scandal, I sat in courtrooms alongside reporters from across the globe. While many of the hundreds of women and girls abused by Nassar wanted their names and faces shown, some did not. To my knowledge, their requests were always honored.

The choice to allow that anonymity was not made lightly.

When we cover court cases, it’s important to us to identify all witnesses so readers can judge their character against that of the accused. One of the reasons newspapers cover court cases is so readers can judge whether their governments are properly executing justice. The more information readers have, the easier that is.

But sexual assault cases are different.

Many victims struggle with self-doubt, asking themselves for the rest of their lives what they could have done differently to avoid the situation or if they may have done something to invite the abuse. While they’re beating themselves up, too many people beat up on them, too, telling them they should have done something differently, or that they invited the abuse somehow, or flat-out not believing them.

That leaves a scar on heart, soul, and psyche that never truly heals. Suicide attempts are all too common among sex assault victims.

Journalists don’t identify such victims to protect them from that harassment.

That steadfast rule means we don’t cover some cases, because identifying the accused — which we must do — might identify the accuser.

But what about the other side of the coin? What about the rights of the accused?

On the day NBA star Kobe Bryant, along with his 13-year-old daughter and several others, died in a helicopter crash near Los Angeles, Washington Post reporter Felicia Sonmez tweeted out a link to another outlet’s years-old story about Bryant’s 2003 rape case.

Bryant was accused of raping a woman who worked at a Colorado hotel. The charges were dropped when the accuser refused to testify. The woman later settled a lawsuit against Bryant, and Bryant eventually publicly apologized to the woman, conceding she did not view the sex as consensual (which means it wasn’t, doesn’t it?). (ESPN still has the complete text of Bryant’s apology online: https://tinyurl.com/r9ftyq3).

Sonmez’s tweet garnered swift backlash on social media. She received death threats via email. The reporter tweeted back at her attackers, in some cases identifying them by name.

Sonmez has openly talked about her own experience with sexual assault.

It appears she was not working on the Post’s coverage of Bryant’s death.

The Post suspended Sonmez, saying her tweets “displayed poor judgment that undermined the work of her colleagues.” She was reinstated within a couple days. The Post’s management called her tweets “ill-timed” but said they did not violate the paper’s social media policy.

I’ll be honest. I don’t know how I might have handled that one.

On one hand, you have Bryant’s mourning family, the pain of loss still raw in their hearts, a child dead. Bringing up 17-year-old misdeeds would certainly add to that pain.

On the other, you have Bryant’s victim, who almost couldn’t turn on her TV this week without seeing celebrity after celebrity paying tribute to the man who may have left a lifelong scar deep in her soul. That certainly added to her pain.

When you agree to take millions of dollars in exchange for playing a game in public, you open yourself up to a certain amount of public scrutiny. The 2003 case should absolutely have been a part of any Bryant biography appearing under a reporter’s byline (the Post’s initial story on the helicopter crash did not mention the case).

Sonmez said her original tweet was meant to complete Bryant’s biography for her Twitter followers.

The question is, should you do so on the day of the death?

Out of respect to his memory and his family, should you wait?

If so, how long should you wait?

And what about respecting the victim and her family?

I won’t try to Monday-morning-quarterback the decisions Sonmez or her managers made this week, but I highlight the saga because it illustrates the sometimes agonizing debates that happen in newsrooms every day.

We strive always to produce work that serves the truth, with the least amount of collateral damage.

And that path isn’t always clear.

Justin A. Hinkley can be reached at 989-358-5686 or jhinkley@thealpenanews.com. Follow him on Twitter @JustinHinkley.

Newsletter

Today's breaking news and more in your inbox

I'm interested in (please check all that apply)
Are you a paying subscriber to the newspaper? *
   

Starting at $4.62/week.

Subscribe Today