mercoledì 18 maggio 2011

The Danger of Outing Alleged Rape Victims Through Reporting

Dominique Strauss-Kahn, center, left a New York Police Department
precinct for Manhattan Criminal Court late Sunday
(Robert Stolarik for The New York Times).

Jeffrey Goldberg ha scritto questo due gionri fa su The Atlantic e vale la pena leggerlo.
From the Times' coverage of the Dominique Strauss-Kahn matter:
The (alleged victim) lives in the Bronx with a daughter who is in her teens. The building's superintendent said she moved in a few months ago.

"They're good people," said one neighbor, another African immigrant. "Every time I see her I'm happy because we're both from Africa. She's never given a problem for nobody. Never noisy. Everything nice."

At the Sofitel New York, a maid, who refused to give her name, described the woman as friendly. "In the world, she is a good person," she said.
I don't understand reporting like this. What is the point? Does it matter that she is friendly? Does it matter that she is a good person? Does it matter that she has never been a problem? Of course not. Rape is rape. The character of the victim is irrelevant. There's one caveat to this idea: If reporters had discovered in the woman's past a pattern of making false accusations in criminal matters, well, then there's a plausible argument that information about her character should be reported. Otherwise, her mood, relative-friendliness or unfriendliness, shopping habits, dietary needs -- all completely immaterial.

One more thing: Reporters should think twice about visiting the neighborhood of an alleged rape victim in order to ask questions about her life and character. The unintended consequence of such a visit is to publicize, in the place where she lives, her plight, and raise possibly-destructive questions about her situation. Newspapers withhold the names of alleged rape victims for a reason: to protect their privacy. But when reporters ask family, friends and neighbors superfluous questions about the alleged rape victim, they have outed her in the place that matters most.

3 commenti:

Anonimo ha detto...

Questo tizio paga 3000 euro a notte per stare in albergo... non ha nessun motivo per stuprare. Con 1/10 di quella somma può pagarsi una escort coi fiocchi. Questa storia non è per niente convincente.

Rainbow ha detto...

Anche Leopold e Loeb non avevano nessun motivo per uccidere.
Uomini come Strauss-Khan finiscono per credere che tutto sia loro permesso...

Rainbow ha detto...

Hey Mr Dominique Strauss Kahn
(Sung as "Hey Mr Tambourine Man"

Hey mr Dominick Strauss-Khan
You thought you owned the world
When you saw a poor humble maid
you tried to rape her
Hey Mr Dominick Strauss-Khan
No-one belongs to you
Keep your filthy prick off us
Or the law will get you
Hey Mr Dominick Strauss-Khan
You're reaping what you deserved
And power isn't an excuse
For you the others to abuse