Duke lacrosse: McClatchy’s N&O is unbelievable

The McClatchy news organization’s Raleigh News & Observer broke the Duke lacrosse story with a Mar. 24 report in which it seven times described the accuser as either “the victim” or used the possessive “the victim’s.”

The N&O never qualified any of its seven "victim" descriptions with the customary "alleged" or "reported."

The N&O's decision to seven times describe the accuser as a victim in that first story helped frame the Duke lacrosse players in the public mind as her victimizers. By doing that, the N&O was not only grossly unfair to the lacrosse players, it misled its readers.

Many of those readers have criticized the N&O for its unfairness to the players and misleading them.

Yesterday, at The Editor's Blog, Melanie Sill, the N&O’s executive editor for news, received a reader comment which included this (scroll down on thread):

”[The] N&O should feel under some obligation to make up for its initial take on this story--the initial articles, for instance, electing to designate the woman making the charges as the "victim" rather than the "alleged victim" or the "accuser." (The March 24 article is a good example.)

This word choice essentially accepted one of Nifong's basic assertions--that a rape occurred.

The reader followed up with another comment which included a question:

On the victim point, perhaps I can ask a question: does the N&O have a general policy on this issue (i.e., everyone who files a criminal report that the police investigates is labeled from the start a "victim") or was a specific decision made in this case to describe the dancer as a "victim" before charges were filed?

Sill responded:

Comment from: Melanie Sill [Member] http://www.newsobserver.com
06/14/06 at 12:22
Marl.

Yes it's fairly routine for us to use the word "victim" in crime reports in describing the person who made the report. Sometimes it's amended "reported victim" or simply more descriptive. People report crimes, but police and law enforcment officials bring charges. […]

Unbelievable!

After reading Sill’s response, I called an editor at the Durham Herald Sun. What is the H-S’s policy on using “victim” without qualification in a case like Duke lacrosse?

We’ve tried to stay away from “victim.” We’ve mostly used “accuser;” sometimes “dancer;” that kind of thing.

I asked if the editor was sure the H-S didn’t at least sometimes use just “victim”

I can’t say for certain it didn’t happen. But if it did, it got by us. If you can find where we did, we’ll make a correction.

We don't want to use "victim" in this kind of circumstance. It's not fair to the other person or persons.

I have Times Select so this morning I went to the NY Times archives and read five Duke lacrosse articles, each of more than one thousand words.

None of the five articles used the term “victim.” Instead, terms such as “woman,” “dancer,” and most often, “accuser” were used.

In his recent letter to the N&O, Duke Law Professor James E. Coleman Jr. referred to the accuser five times as "victim," but in each case preceded it with "alleged."

But at McClatchy’s Raleigh News & Observer:

Yes it's fairly routine for us to use the word "victim" in crime reports in describing the person who made the report.

And the N&O says it’s the Duke Men's lacrosse team that’s "swaggered for years?"

Unbelievable!
______________________________
Post URLs:
http://www.newsobserver.com/102/story/421494.html

http://blogs.newsobserver.com/editor/index.php?title=duke_lacrosse_comments_1&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1

http://www.newsobserver.com/580/v-print/story/449892.html