List of examples of the media's irresponsible reporting of VAWG

[ForkfulOfTabouleh]

The Home Office Document published today on VAWG has many many actions but I think that there is one that we here as the MN Feminists can have a brilliant impact on.

The action is #8 in the report:

Work with the National Union of Journalists to produce guidance for journalists reporting on issues relating to VAWG.

This will encourage responsible reporting of VAWG which does not perpetuate the myths or beliefs which fuel it; for example, referring to a 'crime of passion' when someone is murdered by their partner or ex-partner.

I thought that we can list examples of irresponsible reporting as we see them and any old ones we can think of. Then we can ask MN Towers to forward them for us.

Daily Mail - reporting a rape story and then adding on the bottom a "false rape" story.

Daily Mail - misrepresents story about encouraging the teaching of sexual consent.

The VAGW report says

Encourage the teaching of sexual consent within the curriculum. This work will be taken forward in the context of the Department of Education?s review of Personal Social Health and Economic (PSHE) education, which will also consider Sex and Relationship Education (SRE). We will look at how all schools are able to follow good practice regarding the teaching of sexual consent.

It does not say "Primary school pupils as young as FIVE to be taught 'no means no' in sex education lessons on importance of consent." FFS

Nowhere in the VAGW report does it mention "no means no" because it is not the women's responsibility to say "no" but the man's responsibility to ensure they have consent etc.

Bumping this because I think it's a brilliant idea - and will make excellent blog fodder for me, too.

great idea. will keep a lookout.

Daily Mail - "the soccer players were encouraged by the schoolgirl 'Lolitas'"

They should not be using that phrase. It is not responsible reporting.

Daily Mail - Sex Trafficking Victim wins damages from home office.

Totally inappropriate to use a photo of part of a woman in stockings. .

Objectification, anyone?

This woman was repeatedly beaten, raped and trafficked around Europe before our Government sent her back to her home country - so that her attackers re-captured her. .

Using that photo is perpetuating the myth of prostitute = confident young woman "up for it".

There is no mention of it being illegal for men to pay for sex with women rape trafficked women!

The comments are all part of the article. DM set up the scenario and wait for the comments to say what they decided they couldn't say.

Good for you for keeping this up, Fork... That soccer players story has shocked me especially. I'm going to start a thread on it because there's an aspect of the story I hadn't realised....