There were other outlets that failed here (though some, notably Yahoo’s Dan Wetzel and the Cleveland Plain Dealer’s Rachel Dissell, got it right ). ThinkProgress points out that NBC News also discussed the boys’ “promising future,” now curtailed by being convicted of rape. The network didn’t mention that their future went off track by their own decision to commit a crime. Similarly, the Associated Press began a story by identifying the victim as a “drunken 16-year-old,” while the defendants were described as being part of “Steubenville’s celebrated high school football team.” (They, of course, had also been drinking.) USA Today also described her as “drunken.” This framing could easily have been handled differently. For one thing, back in September The Plain Dealer reported that the victim might have been drugged. This possibility was later corroborated by the victim on the witness stand. “Possibly drugged” or “unconscious” would have been better adjectives than “drunken.”
Additionally, Fox, CNN, and MSNBC ran the name of the victim in news clips, neglecting to drop the sound when one of the rapists named her in his apology. Dropping sound is an easy edit and is done by networks all the time for less weighty reasons. There is no excuse for not doing it here.
There is a lot one could say—and people are, eloquently—about the invidiousness of rape culture, the callousness of social media, and about the disparity in the treatment of athletes accused of rape and victims of those athletes.
But there is only one thing to say to the media: You know better. In 2013, after covering dozens of sexual assaults by athletes, you know better. You know better than to act as if it is a tragedy that the lives of athlete-rapists are ruined when they themselves chose to do the ruining. You know better than to insinuate that since the victim was drunk she may have deserved or wanted the assault to happen. You know better. And you should each apologize. And next time it happens—say, today, now that two athletes have been charged with sexual assault in Connecticut—you must do better.
I think calling digital penetration “rape” trivializes rape.
It is certainly sexual assault and should be dealt with seriously. But calling it rape -- even if stupid laws call it so -- encourages perpetrators to go the whole way.
We need sanity, not knee jerks.
#1 Posted by Bill, CJR on Fri 22 Mar 2013 at 10:22 AM
Digital penetration is rape, Bill. I hate to "go there" but think about how you might feel if someone penetrated you with anything: fingers, penis, iron rod. rape is rape. That these boys didn't use their penises or an iron rod (as was the case in the deadly gang rape in India) is reflected in their rather mild sentence. But it is still rape.
The coverage has been awful. As a young journalist and a rape survivor, I have had a lot of trouble watching/reading. I am so happy for Jane Doe. She got the justice so many survivors will never get. But the media, save a few, really screwed this one up. It's despicable and they SHOULD know better. Thank you Jennifer for this piece. And thank you CJR for publishing it.
#2 Posted by amelia harnish, CJR on Fri 22 Mar 2013 at 12:09 PM
against your will** in case that's not obvious what I meant above.
#3 Posted by amelia harnish, CJR on Fri 22 Mar 2013 at 12:13 PM
I agree 100% with Bill. Charging these boys with rape is insane. And it does trivialize rape. Rape is a horrible and violent act. And I agree that it is a sexual assault and should be dealt with seriously as well. But the most attention should be brought by the excessive teenage drinking and driving leading to poor decision making by all! I know if I was suffering from post traumatic stress disorder after a violent rape and the victim was receiving so much sympathy for voluntarily being black out drunk and not remember being digitally penetrated, although at one point she was awake and actively participating, I would be angry! And I'm angry that we are putting teenagers in jail and deystroying their future when they are not violent or dangerous. They were drunk and stupid and deserve to be punished but do we really want to put them in jail, waste resources, deprive them of an education so they can learn to be criminals?
#4 Posted by Barb, CJR on Sat 23 Mar 2013 at 02:03 AM
@Barb: being drunk and stupid is texting that boy that dumped you a few weeks ago begging him to take you back. Or it is lying down in the middle of the road thinking it is your bed. Or it is peeing or throwing up on your mom's new carpet. Or perhaps posting a picture of your privates on Twitter. But sometimes your stupid drunk actions lead to hurt someone else - you drive and get into a car accident, and kill the other person; you force yourself on a girl and allow others to take pictures of it which you then post on the internet - then your drunk stupid actions turn into a crime. And crimes have consequences.
Also, @barb and bill, I have seen a lot of reactions from rape survivors (such as Amelia's here above). Not a single one has been angry for the reason you mention, that felt this girl's experience trivialized their own.
By penetrating this girl, however they did it, they violated her body. Just because she was drunk / unconscious, that doesn't mean she was theirs to take advantage of and play with. Definitions of rape and sexual assault vary by state, but both are criminal acts, whose gravity warrants punishment.
#5 Posted by Ella, CJR on Sat 23 Mar 2013 at 02:09 PM
I'm a survivor of violent rape and I am not angry that digital penetration is considered to be rape. Of course it is, it is penetration without her consent!
I am angry with people trivialising what happened to this girl and suggesting the boys didn't really do anything wrong.
#6 Posted by Philippa, CJR on Sun 24 Mar 2013 at 06:01 AM
Do words have meaning? Do terms in law (criminal law) have precise meaning or don't they? If they do, then it behooves us to act and speak in accordance. That doesn't mean what was done wasn't terrible, but it was not rape because what happened, which the court found as a matter of fact, was not rape as matter of law. Again, that doesn't mean it wasn't a terrible thing. What's also terrible, though, is distorting language to fit a mindset.
#7 Posted by Ted Fontenot, CJR on Mon 25 Mar 2013 at 12:34 AM
I'm in complete agreement with Barb. A digital penetration is NOT rape, it is molestation. This victim got drunk and decided to party with some boys in the back seat. According to some of the articles I've read, she gave one of them a hand job earlier in the evening. She was mumbling while being penetrated so did these drunk boys think she was enjoying it? There was definitely some sl*tshaming going on. Texts were sent because kids were drunk and had no respect for her. Yes, it is terrible and cruel but those boys should be serving community service sentences, not jail.
#8 Posted by sparemethedramatics, CJR on Tue 14 May 2013 at 01:02 PM