Dear Dr. Ink:
As … an admirer of the Poynter Institute, I was wondering what you all thought of a new phenomenon I’ve noticed in journalism.
We’ll take the hot topic of Kobe Bryant as an example. Many journalists are calling the 19-year-old woman an “alleged” rape victim.
“Alleged” immediately questions the veracity of the victim. A rape victim who is attacked tonight on the East Side of Los Angeles by an unknown assailant or serial rapist I assure you would not be identified as “alleged.” Why is it different with Kobe Bryant? If the victim were an 8-year-old girl with perhaps other signs of physical assault on her beside the rape and the suspect was Kobe Bryant, would she too be called “alleged” victim?
Do 8-year-olds sleep around? Do they lie about being raped? I would appreciate your response.
Thanks,
Terri Russell/KOLO
Answer:
The Kobe Bryant case is about sports, celebrity, sex, race, and criminality. Pick your poison. Any one of these can excite or cloud news judgment. Together they form a strange brew that threatens to intoxicate even the most responsible news organization. What is missing, as commentator Susan Estrich recently pointed out, is ambiguity.
Dr. Ink is glad to see that mainstream news media have, until now, refrained from naming the woman who has accused Bryant of rape. That has not kept news organizations from revealing personal facts about her life and character –- some of which are already being used to question her emotional stability and veracity.
The morning of July 21, ESPN, quoting newspaper sources, reported that the young woman’s name, image, address, and phone number are now widely available on the Internet. We have been told that the young woman was mourning the recent death of a close friend, and had been taken to the hospital after an overdose of medication.
Then follows the inevitable parade of legal experts, some who claim that this information is likely to help exonerate Bryant, others who claim it would be irrelevant and inadmissible.
This is sad, sad stuff to the Doc, who considers himself the champion of a free and unruly press, but finds himself a bit queasy standing in this pool of rising muck.
But back to “alleged.” This word is used, in law and media, to reinforce the presumption of innocence. It is true to say, in a legal sense, that Dr. Ink is not a victim of a crime until it is proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
There is no reason, however, to use the word to cast doubt about the person who claims to be the victim of a crime. Doc says: Let’s call that person “the accuser” rather than “the alleged victim.”
The American Heritage Dictionary writes that the word “allege” refers to “making a controversial charge or statement without presentation of proof.”
According to the AP Stylebook, “the word must be used with great care.” The Stylebook offers some guidelines:
- “Avoid any suggestion that the writer is making an allegation.”
- “Specify the source of an allegation. In a criminal case, it should be an arrest record, an indictment or the statement of a public official connected with the case.”
- “Use ‘alleged bribe’ or similar phrase when necessary to make clear that an unproved action is not to be treated as fact. Be sure that the source of the charge is specified elsewhere in the story.”
In the end, there are only two actions that might help to free all of us from the sorry circumstances of this sad, sad story:
- The young woman could come forward, surrounded by her supporters, and identify herself. “Here’s who I am. Here’s my name. Here’s my story. I stand by it in every particular.” Yes, her name and photo would be everywhere, but such self-exposure might help neutralize the poison that always seems to spread under the feet of the accuser in celebrity cases such as this one.
- The judge might have to gag everyone in the United States. Doc has never suggested this remedy in any case he can remember. But maybe all of us -– public, players, personal friends, prosecutors, members of the press -– need, on occasion, a Solomon to save us from ourselves.
