Female Journalist Suspended After Tweeting Kobe Bryant Rape Article

If you can’t see the difference between an article thoughtfully written and a thoughtless tweet sent out while the bodies were still burning, then I really can’t help you.

Seriously! Every single article/news piece I read about his tragic death mentioned the rape - while the bodies were still burning as you so charmingly say. There is no difference between a "thoughtfully written" article and a bald reminder of an important event in this man's life. Thoughtfully written doesn't change what happened. Does making this woman's ordeal some sort of an analysis of culture or whatever change what happened? If you can't see this I can't really help you.

The journalist has now been reinstated. She should never have been fired. The Washington Post seriously messed up on this one.

Just to note that the rape was included in the obituary on Radio 4's Last Word just now.

'The victim also might want to be left out of the conversation. Potentially new life, kids etc.' Yes, I don't think the treatment of Ms Sonmez would encourage anyone to muse publicly about this, least of all the victim.

whatnow I’m absolutely certain his victim doesn’t want to play a part in this; I imagine she continues to wish the whole thing had never happened. But she probably has no choice - it’s pretty lose, lose isn’t it? Either no mention of it and the knowledge that your violent rapist is being lionised as a national hero or mention of it and being retraumatised?

Who knows whether the settlement helped? I doubt she forgot all about it once the money landed in her bank account. Not sure why you feel the need to mention the amount.

Doubleraspberry - The victim also might want to be left out of the conversation. Potentially new life, kids etc.

She may have felt the 2.5 million payout was justice & seeing her rape case relitigated on the front of newspapers so many years later might also be traumatic.

Ultimately no one knows.

I haven't read about any of those journalists being driven out of their homes or suspended from their jobs. It reads like Ms Sonmez has been fed to the wolves - twice

If you can’t see the difference between an article thoughtfully written and a thoughtless tweet sent out while the bodies were still burning, then I really can’t help you.

'An aside in this #metoo era I would expect the full force of the loudest and most eloquent voices of that movement to come down on Bryant’s legacy hard, but then again his victim was a 19 year old hotel worker and no one of any particular great fame herself.' Who are the loudest and most eloquent voices in that movement? And why would they expose themselves to even more abuse after opening up to it the first time? I'm uncomfortable with the idea of adding this task to anyone's responsibilities just because they've said #metoo.

Not to discredit anyone associated with it or victims of sexual assault who've stood up via #metoo but #metoo has been seized upon by virtue signallers everywhere, including individuals and institutions who have given no real thought to women's oppression. It's just a little above-the-parapet thrill for some people, just #metoo, pat yourself on the back for smashing the patriarchy or whatever and go on with your day. It makes me very cross in ways I have trouble articulating. It's the AIDS ribbon all over again.

I'd quite like people who are relatively bulletproof in this regard (anyone who can speak up without risking a load of death threats, draw your own conclusions) to stand up for sexual assault victims, but in the end the bulk of the responsibility for change lies with people who threaten and perpetrate sexual violence and those who are charged with administering justice, neither of whom show much interest in change.

I should imagine it could be traumatic for any survivor where the perpetrator got away with it. It basically means if you have talent/power/money of some kind rape away people will still venerate you.

An aside in this #metoo era I would expect the full force of the loudest and most eloquent voices of that movement to come down on Bryant’s legacy hard, but then again his victim was a 19 year old hotel worker and no one of any particular great fame herself.

The sad fact is that #metoo is really only an incremental shuffle forward in that the media are only likely to get behind you. Of note kudos to the actress Evan Rachel Wood, who is the only one I have seen speak up, and of course she is getting a faceful of abuse for it.

Interesting that the police reported that one of the first things KB did after being accused of rape was to ask if there was 'any way he could settle it'.

Indeed, and lie to the police too, from the very outset. I’ve said already on MN that he said at one point that he should have offered her money or a car to make it go away ‘like [other very famous basketball player] does’.

She was tweeting on her own account

She is a representative of WaPo and they do have social media guidelines.

Tweeting on her own account as in not tweeting a news story under the WP account. It’s now been established that she didn’t break the papers social media guidelines. I don’t know how many professional blue tick journalists you follow on Twitter but most of their tweets are not original content. They retweet as much as anyone else, often controversial articles.

No, sorry, I don’t see why a ‘thoughtful’ article would be particularly different as your objection appears to be that it was insensitive to retweet an article about the rape so soon. Or does this ‘thoughtful’ article need to say that we don’t need to think about that ‘blip’ really?

No, no one has asked the victim what she thinks. Why on earth should she be put through that? She has returned to the anonymity she should never have lost. But I don’t think it takes an enormous stretch of the imagination to think she would find mass media coverage of what a hero her rapist was rather hard to take.

www.thedailybeast.com/kobe-bryants-disturbing-rape-case-the-dna-evidence-the-accusers-story-and-the-half-confession

Interesting that the police reported that one of the first things KB did after being accused of rape was to ask if there was 'any way he could settle it'.

This convention may be the starting point and rationalisation for the outrage but loads of articles have mentioned the allegations against KB including the NYT obit above, and this one in WaPo: www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/01/27/posts-misguided-suspension-felicia-sonmez-over-kobe-bryant-tweets/ I haven't read about any of those journalists being driven out of their homes or suspended from their jobs. It reads like Ms Sonmez has been fed to the wolves - twice.

I think reading all the saccharine accounts of what a good man Kobe was will grate for any survivor of rape, or sexual abuse.

Ms Sonmez was brave to remind people about the reality.

"After all the eulogies (led on BBCTV by Esther Rantzen) for Saville, perhaps this tradition needs examining."

Well said. That IMHO is a bang on comment.

It's this social convention we have that you mustn't say bad things about people when they die, until after a decent interval.

After all the eulogies (led on BBCTV by Esther Rantzen) for Saville, perhaps this tradition needs examining.

I'm really pleased to read that Ms Sonmez has been cleared of violating the WaPo sm policy and reinstated after more than 300 colleagues voiced their support.

She has stated that she didn't think the article she linked to needed further comment; the lack of comment was deliberate and not an oversight. I suspect that she thought tweeting a link would make her less of a target than a comment piece but that's just my speculation.

Unfortunately for WaPo they are now the story. This has exposed how lax they were in the past when Ms Sonmez wrote about her own sexual assault. It sounds like a toxic environment for her and people like her. As a feminist and a survivor of assault I appreciate reading about the support she has received. After breakfast I'm going to send her a note of thanks and support.

I agree that she deserves an apology.
www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jan/29/washington-post-felicia-sonmez-kobe-bryant

I can't imagine why I'd return to the feminism boards again and again to defend a rapist and criticise a sexual assault survivor who has recently been the target of death and rape threats, had her home address posted online, had to flee for her own safety and been erroneously suspended from her job. Different strokes for different folks.

There is room for all sorts of different stories about his life, this was one of them.

If I was the victim seeing that article might have provided me with a crumb of comfort

But you aren’t the victim. In fact, we have no idea how she feels because no one has bothered to write that article yet. But that story would be a hell of a lot better than what happened here.

There are other people in this mess you know. If I was the victim seeing that article might have provided me with a crumb of comfort.

She was tweeting on her own account

She is a representative of WaPo and they do have social media guidelines. Your private account on Twitter is most definitely not private if you are a blue checkmarked reporter with your employer clearly stated. Any media worker gets these guidelines the first day on the job. It’s also a reflection on the media company like it or not.

isn’t enormously clear to me

It should be very clear to you how a thoughtful article on the dangers of whitewashing sports stars/politicians/etc after death is dangerous would be different than a lazy retweet of an article from another outlet written years ago by another person that is now out of date while the bodies are still smoldering.

She was tweeting on her own account. Most journalists aren’t tweeting/retweeting original content the majority of the time. Your point really seems to be that retweeting an article regarding the rape accusation was trolling.

Quite how the article you suggest she write (and I suspect this story will now be part of the many versions of it that are now being written) would be shitting less on Kobe than retweeting this story isn’t enormously clear to me. You either mention the rape or you don’t.

How on earth is tweeting a link to a well written and pretty balanced article ‘trolling’? Why should she rewrite it if she thinks it expresses her own opinion?

It’s not journalism is my point. It’s just a lazy tweet that shit on someone who literally just died in a fire with their teenage daughter.

Also, don’t you think there would be additional context from his death and how people tend to whitewash things afterwards? There’s not an article in that very thing?

Nah, too much work. Let’s just retweet this and call it a day. This is not journalism!

was horrified by the report of Kobe's death on R4 (don't know which show), and the man talking about him was saying - he was so loyal, stayed at lakers for however many years, so talented, and except for one allegation of sexual assault that was settled out of court no one ever said anything bad about him. The rape was just a throwaway comment, totally minimised. It was starkly shockingly awful.

I think this kind of thing is why some people weren't prepared to stay silent while all this over the top performative grief was going on.