Identifying an Alleged Victim of Rape

Rape is a crime of violence. Then why, when the news media report an alleged rape, shouldn’t it be treated as if it were any other crime?

The answer is both obvious and complex--and it’s one that news executives are now debating with intensity.

Nearly three weeks ago, a woman accused William Kennedy Smith, nephew of Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), of rape in Palm Beach, Fla. At first, news organizations observed the well-established policy of not revealing the alleged victim’s name; this is the longstanding policy of The Times. After some tabloids broke that self-imposed media restraint, a network and then a major newspaper--in a major break with the practice of serious news organizations--revealed her identity.

That decision is troubling. The need for sensitivity and privacy in rape cases is well established. News organizations ordinarily advocate a free and open information policy almost as an absolute. But in certain circumstances, self-restraint is warranted. Certain national-security stories are one example; rape stories are another.

The rationale for revealing the alleged rape victim’s name goes like this: Rather than stigmatizing the woman, the network and some civil libertarians argue, they are somehow liberating her from the notion that rape carries a stigma. Had the network not told her name and shown her picture to the nation, news organizations would have done all rape victims a disservice by treating them differently from other crime victims.

That’s a disingenuous argument. Rape is a special case. Even though rape is a crime no matter what the circumstance, too often the victim can become in effect the defendant, whose behavior or history somehow “encouraged” the violence. That was certainly the case in this story. One prominent newspaper did a profile of the alleged victim, whom it named. It described her as a single mother who frequented bars and was said to have had “a little wild streak” in ninth grade. That’s the kind of coverage rape crime can attract; no wonder not every woman wants to go public.

Maybe rape ought to be seen by society as no different from any other violent attack. But when there is an accusation of rape, too often all the usual bets are off. Sex shouldn’t, but does, cloud and distort issues of character and credibility. Suddenly, the question isn’t “is the accused guilty?” but “is the alleged victim guilty?” Not-so-subtly between the lines in stories about the alleged victim is the insidious question: Even if it’s true, did she “ask” to be raped?

That’s why the press should not overturn a sensible policy by hiding behind a political agenda that tells a woman that rape is just another crime. It isn’t. If an alleged rape victim wants her name revealed, that is her decision. It should not be made by editors in search of a story or activists in search of a cause.