Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Reporting on the BBC (and elsewhere)

30 replies

SevenZarkSeven · 19/07/2014 10:49

Just noticed something on the BBC today.

There have been many thread where it has been raised / touched on about media reporting of sex crimes and how many on here feel that a lot of reporting seems to imply that the accusation is all a bit dubious, because of the whole woman "raped" type headlines, with the "".

And noted that often it seems to be that "proper" victims will be described as having been raped, while other victims will have been "raped".

Others say that while it is an accusation it needs to have the "" and this is a legal thing and in no way is meant to imply that anyone might be making anything up however that doesn't stack up for me as I'm sure the "" are not applied consistently in situations or across crimes.

In my heart I feel that many reporters, when reporting sex crimes, think well I need to put it in "" as these often turn out to be untrue. Not consciously even, maybe.

Anyway, today on the BBC is an article about victims right of appeal that says this:

"Among the 146 successful victims' appeals were 80 cases of violence and 27 involving alleged sexual offences."

It just made me so mad! What do you feel about this? Given that the media shape public opinion, this sort of stuff sends a strong message, right? What can be done?

OP posts:
Bifauxnen · 19/07/2014 14:20

I was reading an article the other day reporting a man who had pleaded guilty to rape and it still described them as alleged rapes.
There's also the use of the phrase "had sex with" when the word rape should be used.

Misfitless · 19/07/2014 11:10

Yes, thanks OP.

I'm going to watch out for this from now on.

Original poster
SevenZarkSeven · 19/07/2014 11:01

Ah this

"Among the 146 successful victims' appeals were 80 cases of violence and 27 involving alleged sexual offences"

So the violence is reported straight - not alleged.
The sex crimes are however alleged. Because they haven't been proven yet.
Subtext to that is discomfiting.

Other reporting - you will often see that "proper" victims - children, the elderly, men, are raped. Women and girls between about 11 and 60 are more likely to be reported as "raped", again the implication heads in one direction (this stuff accumulates). People are rarely "defrauded" or "mugged" - they are more likely to be defrauded or mugged.

DYSWIM?

Oftentimes people will say that the reason for "raped" is legal - until proven it is merely an accusation. However I have always noticed and felt that the "" are applied inconsistently across victims, situations and crimes.

This one in the BBC is quite stark though I think, no room for saying it's legal reasons that the violence is violence and the sex crimes are merely "alleged".

I find the way sex crimes are reported concerning, I guess, and this is a solid example of why.

Does that make more sense?

OP posts:
AuntieStella · 19/07/2014 10:58

I'm not sure which reports you refer to.

If it is a case if the difference between reporting after a guilty verdict, and a report when, legally, it remains an allegation, I can see a rationale for this (to avoid prejudicial reporting). But I agree with you completely that the use of " " is a very bad way to do this. It would be far better instead to insert the word 'alleged' into the sentence.

It will never be the same across all offences though, because for many there is quite a different body of evidence that a crime has been committed (corpse, injuries, damage). But to me, that is an argument for greater care in the wording of reports on sexual offences is required.

Misfitless · 19/07/2014 10:55

I'm not sure I understand, sorry. I won't to know what you mean, but am struggling.

Am waiting to read responses, though.