Student Journalists’ Ethical Approaches to Coverage of Campus Sexual Misconduct

A thesis presented to

the faculty of

the Scripps College of Communication of Ohio University

In partial fulfillment

of the requirements for the degree

Master of Science

Megan E. Reed

August 2018

© 2018 Megan E. Reed. All Rights Reserved. This thesis titled

Student Journalists’ Ethical Approaches to Coverage of Campus Sexual Misconduct

by

MEGAN E. REED

has been approved for

the E.W. Scripps School of Journalism

and the Scripps College of Communication by

Bill Reader

Associate Professor of Journalism

Scott Titsworth

Dean, Scripps College of Communication

ii

Abstract

REED, MEGAN E., M.S., August 2018, Journalism

Student Journalists’ Ethical Approaches to Coverage of Campus Sexual Misconduct

Director of Thesis: Bill Reader

Sexual misconduct, particularly on college campuses, has gained media attention in recent years due to policy changes in universities’ handling of cases, student activism, and several high-profile cases involving universities. Student newspapers have been tasked with covering assault on their own campuses, and those student journalists are in the unique position of covering a sensitive issue that involves their peers and, in some cases, involves the journalists themselves. This thesis includes qualitative interviews with

20 current and former student journalists who covered campus sexual misconduct at their student newspapers. The journalists interviewed described their sexual assault coverage as different from other stories they had covered, and the journalists encountered several difficult ethical dilemmas throughout the reporting processes. Although the journalists dealt with internal biases and many struggled with emotional connections to the stories and their sources, they still strived for objectivity by focusing on the journalistic values of fairness and balance.

iii

Table of Contents Page

Abstract ...... iii Introduction ...... 1 Literature Review...... 2 Background ...... 2 Student Journalists Covering Sexual Assault ...... 14 Journalism Ethics When Covering Sexual Assault ...... 18 Fairness and Balance...... 18 Conflict of Interest ...... 21 Sensitivity vs. Obligation to Inform...... 22 Privacy vs. Public’s Right to Know ...... 26 Research Questions ...... 42 Method ...... 45 Identifying Potential Research Subjects and Refining Research Questions ...... 45 Subject Recruitment ...... 46 Qualitative Interviewing and Subject Debriefing ...... 48 Interview Protocols: Priming, Structured, and Unstructured Questions ...... 50 Results ...... 52 Discussion ...... 67 Objectivity in Covering Sexual Assault as a Crime...... 69 Conflict of Interest and Personal Connections to Assault ...... 72 Concern about Negative Effect of Stories ...... 76 Conclusion ...... 79 References ...... 84

iii

Introduction

While sexual assault has long been a problem on college campuses, the issue gained considerable public attention in the 2010s amid several high-profile incidents. The complexities of the problem often leave university administrators struggling to find a balance between protecting their campuses from threats to student safety and ensuring that students accused of assault receive due process and are not unfairly punished by either their universities or their peers (Novkov, 2016; Triplett, 2012; Hendrix, 2013).

Although they are not responsible for investigating assaults or sanctioning perpetrators, student journalists are faced with another difficult decision—reconciling their duty to inform their communities with their own roles as students and their responsibility to minimize harm to all parties in their reporting.

This thesis explores the ethical implications for student journalists in the United

States who covered sexual assault issues on their own campuses. The qualitative study is particularly concerned with the issues of journalistic fairness and balance in covering such a serious and controversial issue. The study includes interviews with 20 media professionals who have covered sexual assault as student journalists or editors, focusing on how the journalists operationalized the principles of “fairness” and “balance” in their coverage of assault and how they deliberated and made various ethical decisions while covering the issue on their campuses.

1 Literature Review

Background

Many students are angered by the rates of sexual assault reported on college campuses—an estimated 27 percent of women and 8 percent of men had been sexually assaulted during their college years, according to a 2015 campus climate survey report from the Association of American Universities (AAU, 2015). However, it is difficult to accurately determine rates of assault because many students who are assaulted never officially report it. More than 90 percent of campuses reported zero rapes in 2014, according to an American Association of University Women analysis (Becker, 2015).

Various factors can affect survey data, including collection mode, response rate, question wording and the survey’s definition of assault (Sinozich and Langton, 2014), so some surveys vary from the widely reported 27 percent statistic. For example, the National

Crime Victimization Survey, conducted by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, surveyed female students ages 18 to 24 from 1995 to 2013 and found that about 6 out of 1,000, or

0.6 percent, of students reported they had been victims of assault (Sinozich and Langton,

2014).

One controversial aspect of the debate about sexual assault focuses on exaggerated or outright false accusations of assault and their frequency, although the consensus is that false claims are rare. The International Association of Chiefs of ’s

(IACP) policy and accompanying issues paper states that for a case to qualify as a false accusation, a thorough investigation must determine that an assault did not occur (IACP,

2005). According to the IACP, some factors that may lead people to believe an

2 accusation is false include delay in reporting, an accuser’s alcohol or drug use, the person’s sexual history, and discrepancies in the person’s recollections (p. 13). A 2010 study applied the IACP’s criteria for a false accusation to 136 cases reported at a large northeastern university over a 10-year period and found that eight, or 5.9 percent, of the allegations were false (Lisak et al., 2010). People also have different definitions of what constitutes sexual assault, and people may lie to researchers because the topic of assault is viewed by many as taboo (McArdle, 2015). Also, in 2013, the Federal Bureau of

Investigation changed its definition of rape to include victims of any gender and remove the requirement that the assault was forcible. The previous definition had only acknowledged female victims and had required the assault to be “forcible” (FBI, 2013).

Although false allegations do occur, they are relatively rare (Lisak et al., 2010; Lonsway,

2010).

The issues of sexual assault and harassment gained attention in late 2017 with the rise of the “#MeToo” movement, which encouraged victims of assault and harassment to openly discuss their experiences and called for the perpetrators to face consequences. The movement had started years earlier: In 2006, Tarana Burke, an activist and sexual assault survivor, coined the phrase “Me Too” as a way for other survivors of sexual violence, particularly girls and women of color, to show support for each other (Johnson and

Hawbaker, 2018). More than a decade later, in October 2017, actress Alyssa Milano tweeted, “If you've been sexually harassed or assaulted write 'me too' as a reply to this tweet,” and by the next morning, almost 40,000 people had responded with their own experiences (Stevens, 2017). Over the next few months, several high-profile men were

3 accused of sexual misconduct, with many women alleging that these men were repeat offenders. A report from published in October 2017, a few days before Milano’s “#MeToo” tweet, claimed that Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein had been harassing women he worked with for decades (Kantor and Twohey, 2017). Roy

Moore, a U.S. Senate candidate from Alabama, was accused of inappropriate conduct with underage girls (McCrummen et al., 2017). Matt Lauer, long-time co-host of the

“Today” show, was dismissed after NBC received reports of harassment and assault

(Ortiz and Siemaszko, 2017). Senator Al Franken of Minnesota resigned in December

2017 following allegations of misconduct (Stolberg et al., 2017). Those stories, along with many others about misconduct, drew media attention to the issues of assault and harassment and pushed the conversation about misconduct into the spotlight. Time

Magazine named “The Silence Breakers,” or people who had reported misconduct, its

Person of the Year for 2017 (Zacharek et al., 2017).

Although sexual misconduct in general gained national attention in late 2017, students involved in sexual assault cases at their universities had been discussing their experiences for many years. Student activists, often frustrated with how their universities have handled their own reported assaults, have held protests and recruited their peers to call for action. One notable example is that of Emma Sulkowicz, who carried her mattress to all her classes, as well as her graduation, at after the university chose to exonerate a student she had accused of raping her. She gained support from many of her peers, who helped her carry the mattress around campus (DeSantis, 2015).

Students at Columbia have also protested the university’s policy banning audio

4 recordings of student misconduct hearings. The activist group No Red Tape claimed that recording proceedings gives victims the ability to hold the university accountable, while university officials say that students may be discouraged from reporting their assaults if they know that recording is allowed at the misconduct proceedings (Schmidt, 2016).

Baylor University was sued by more than a dozen former students who alleged that the university failed to act on their complaints about sexual abuse, and students, alumni and donors called on Baylor to be more transparent about its dealings with sexual misconduct, particularly involving athletes who may have been receiving preferential treatment

(Mangan, 2016). Brigham Young University attracted attention after students who reported that they had been assaulted said the university was investigating them for

Honor Code violations. The BYU Honor Code bans premarital sex, being in the bedroom of a student of the opposite gender, and drinking and using drugs, among other activities.

Following protests, BYU announced that it would grant disciplinary amnesty to students reporting sexual assault in order to encourage more students to come forward (Brown,

2016).

Sexual misconduct reports often are investigated internally at colleges and universities, usually by student-conduct boards that may be composed of faculty, staff, students, or a combination of representatives from those groups. In the United States, even the federal government has gotten involved: A 2011 “Dear Colleague” letter issued by the U.S. Department of Education under President Barack Obama instructed colleges and universities on how to handle sexual misconduct hearings. The letter clarified that even if a law enforcement investigation were to occur, schools were still required by Title

5 IX to conduct their own investigations—“Police investigations may be useful for fact- gathering; but because the standards for criminal investigations are different, police investigations or reports are not determinative of whether sexual harassment or violence violates Title IX. Conduct may constitute unlawful sexual harassment under Title IX even if the police do not have sufficient evidence of a criminal violation” (U.S.

Department of Education, 2011, p. 10). The future of that instruction was uncertain in

2017 under a new, more right-wing government in the U.S. (New, 2016; Saul and

Goldstein, 2017). Soon after being nominated by President Donald Trump and confirmed by the U.S. Senate, Education Secretary Betsy DeVos reevaluated the Obama administration’s policies because she was concerned about due process and the rights of the accused, and Candice Jackson, leader of the Education Department’s Office of Civil

Rights, apologized after she said that many reported campus rapes were regretted hookups (Stolberg, 2017).

Most universities have appointed Title IX investigators, who often hold other faculty or staff positions on campus (U.S. Department of Education, 2011). Although

Title IX investigators have been required by the U.S. Department of Education to receive training as to what constitutes sexual harassment and sexual violence, there are no specific guidelines for how the training should be conducted or what exactly should be covered (p. 7). Colleges and universities were encouraged by federal guidelines to use the

“preponderance of evidence” standard, meaning that if it is more likely than not that someone has committed assault, they can be found responsible (p. 11). While the U.S.

Department of Education aims for voluntary compliance from colleges and universities, if

6 a school does not comply, the Office of Civil Rights can initiate proceedings to withdraw the school’s federal funding or refer the case to the U.S. Department of Justice (p. 16). As of September 29, 2017, the government had conducted 441 investigations of colleges and universities, and 357 of those cases remained open ( Under

Investigation, 2017).

In September 2017, the U.S. Department of Education withdrew the 2011 “Dear

Colleague” letter and issued interim guidance for colleges handling sexual assault cases.

The new guidance gives colleges the discretion to apply either the preponderance of evidence standard or the “clear and convincing evidence” threshold, both of which have less rigorous standards than the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard often needed for criminal cases (Mangan, 2017). Under the new guidance, colleges are also allowed to facilitate an informal resolution process such as mediation, which was not allowed under the Obama-era guidance. Colleges were also previously encouraged to have an appeals process, but now, they are not required to offer appeals, and if they do, they can decide whether to allow both parties to appeal or just the accused (Mangan, 2017). The new guidance also removes the 60-day time limit colleges had to resolve cases under the

Obama-era guidance (Mangan, 2017).

Although there is near universal condemnation of sexual assault itself, there is some controversy about whether and to what extent universities should handle allegations of the crime. Some have accused university hearings of being biased in favor of the accusers and unfair to the accused (Yoffe, 2014; Nemmer, 2016). Critics of the procedures and the guidelines in the 2011 “Dear Colleague” letter argue that students

7 accused of assault have been deprived of due process because of schools’ efforts to appear sympathetic toward victims and, at the same time, appear to be cracking down on sexual assault. One critic of the policy argues that colleges are not qualified to investigate assaults, and students should not be sanctioned for assault without due process—“A student’s investment in his higher education represents a substantial property interest that he should not be relieved of without Due Process… The interest in these colleges should be in providing education, rather than acting as amateur police officers or prosecutors on matters in which they lack the training of those designated by the State to perform those duties” (Nemmer, 2016, p. 90).

Some universities have changed their internal procedures since the 2011 “Dear

Colleagues” letter. In 2014, Harvard University adjusted its sexual misconduct policy to develop a consistent policy among its 13 schools and adopt the preponderance of evidence standard (Rocheleau, 2014). In response, 28 faculty members from Harvard

Law School issued a statement, citing several concerns they had with the new policy and stating that “as teachers responsible for educating our students about due process of law, the substantive law governing discrimination and violence, appropriate administrative decision-making, and the rule of law generally, we find the new sexual harassment policy inconsistent with many of the most basic principles we teach” (Bartholet et al., 2014).

They said the policy failed to ensure fair representation for the accused, included a definition of “sexual harassment” that exceeded the definitions in Title IX and Title VII law, and had been devised without seeking input from faculty from all schools. Although they said they believed the university was also responsible for protecting students from

8 assault, they wrote that the new policy was too concerned with prevention rather than fairness for all—“The goal must not be simply to go as far as possible in the direction of preventing anything that some might characterize as sexual harassment. The goal must instead be to fully address sexual harassment while at the same time protecting students against unfair and inappropriate discipline, honoring individual relationship autonomy, and maintaining the values of ” (Bartholet et al., 2014).

Sexual misconduct also includes sexual harassment, which differs from assault. In its 2001 guidance on sexual harassment, the U.S. Department of Education defined sexual harassment as “unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature” that includes “unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal, nonverbal, or physical conduct of a sexual nature.” Sexual harassment is a Title IX violation because it can limit a student’s ability to participate in or benefit from school activities and creates a hostile environment (U.S. Department of Education, 2001). Schools are required to investigate reports of sexual harassment and take action to prevent the harassment from recurring.

Although not all instances of sexual assault are crimes, the U.S. Department of Education categorizes some crimes, such as dating violence and sexual assault, as types of harassment (U.S. Department of Education, 2008).

Under the Clery Act, colleges and universities that receive federal funding are required to release an annual public security report with statistics of crime, including sexual assault, on campus for the past three years. The reports are also required to include information about the school’s efforts to prevent sexual assault and their procedure for responding to reports of sexual assault (Clery Center, 2017). The Act requires institutions

9 to provide prevention and awareness programs about assault that focus on bystander intervention and the warning signs of assault. Schools are required to provide victims of sexual assault, domestic and dating violence, and stalking with a written explanation of their rights, which include changes in housing and academic courses. All disciplinary proceedings should be conducted by people who have been trained (Clery Center, 2017).

However, students may be hesitant to report an assault to their universities or the police. Studies of college women have found that they are more likely to confide in a friend rather than report an incident to the police (Orchowski et al., 2009; Fisher et al.,

2003; Sabina and Ho, 2014). Victims may choose not to report their assault for various reasons, including concern that the assault would be seen as their fault, a belief that the police would not do anything or that the assault was not serious enough, a feeling of or embarrassment, or either a fear of the offender or of the offender getting in trouble (Thompson et al., 2007).

Some argue that colleges and universities should be required to report sexual assaults to the police, although others, especially advocates, disagree (Mangan, 2015). In

2015, passed a bill requiring employees of public and private nonprofit institutions who, in the course of their employment, learn about a sexual assault to report it to their school’s Title IX coordinator. The Title IX coordinator is then required to report it to a committee that includes a law enforcement representative, the Title IX coordinator and someone from student affairs. If the committee believes that disclosing the report is necessary for the safety of the reporting student or others, law enforcement will become involved (Virginia, 2015). The bill generated controversy among advocacy

10 groups and assault survivors, who said assault victims would be less likely to report their assaults if they knew police would be involved (Mangan, 2015).

Several advocacy groups have fought against such mandatory reporting rules.

Know Your IX states on its website that the group supports “campus-based adjudication of sexual and dating violence cases as a non-carceral alternative to the criminal legal system, which does not work to support or protect many communities” (Know Your IX,

“Our Values”). The organization partnered with students in Delaware to remove a provision requiring mandatory police reporting from a state bill there (Know Your IX,

“Our Wins”). Kate McCord, a spokeswoman for the advocacy group Virginia Sexual and

Domestic Violence Action Alliance, said of the Virginia mandatory reporting bill,

“mandatory-reporting requirements are a blunt instrument that shouldn’t be applied in cases that require a more nuanced approach” and students should decide whether they want to report an assault to the police (Mangan, 2015).

Many students who report an assault are concerned about their safety, privacy and possible retribution from the accused student or their peers. Title IX requires schools to take “prompt and effective action to stop the harassment and prevent its recurrence” and ensure that students are not prevented from receiving an education or participating in school activities due to the assault (U.S. Department of Education, 2001). Students who report that they have been assaulted can ask their schools for accommodations to increase their sense of safety, including changed class schedules or housing, as well as forbidding contact between the accusers and the accused (U.S. Department of Education, 2001).

11 Both accusers and the accused can face social consequences following a reported assault if they are judged by their peers and the public. Paul Nungesser, the student accused by Emma Sulkowicz at Columbia University, told The New York Times in 2014 that he lost friends after he was publicly declared as a rapist at campus rallies (Kaminer,

2014). He said Sulkowicz carrying her mattress around campus made him feel alienated and bullied (Kaminer, 2014). Columbia later settled with Nungesser under unspecified terms, and the university released a statement saying it would review its policies and their effects on the accused—“Columbia recognizes that after the conclusion of the investigation, Paul’s remaining time at Columbia became very difficult for him and not what Columbia would want any of its students to experience. Columbia will continue to review and update its policies toward ensuring that every student — accuser and accused, including those like Paul who are found not responsible — is treated respectfully and as a full member of the Columbia community” (Taylor, 2017).

In another case, University of Michigan student Drew Sterrett said after a friend accused him of assaulting her, he could not walk campus freely because if he saw his accuser, his actions were viewed as retaliatory (Yoffe, 2014).

However, students who report an assault can also be publicly shamed. Erica

Kinsman, who accused Florida State University football player Jameis Winston of raping her in 2012, had to leave FSU in the aftermath, an experience she publicly recounted in the documentary “” (Payne, 2015). Kinsman received death threats, and she said people praised Winston and shamed her for bringing accusations against him

(Payne, 2015). A woman raped in a residence hall in 2013 in what

12 became a high-profile case stated in court that the public scrutiny had been traumatizing for her, and she was worried people could discover she was a victim—“In this age of technology, anyone I ever meet in my personal or professional life can learn I am a rape victim and the details of the case before I’ve even fully introduced myself to them. There is no way for me to even know if any given person I interact with has done so. This is something I now have to expect for the rest of my life” (Barchenger, 2016).

Smartphones can also contribute to the public shaming of sexual assault victims.

The August 2012 rape of a 16-year-old girl in Steubenville, Ohio, by several other teenagers was heavily documented on cellphones and tablets. Partygoers quickly shared the photos and videos over text and sites (Pennington and Birthisel, 2016).

News coverage of the assault framed Steubenville as a troubled small town with a celebrated high school football team, of which the accused rapists were team members

(Pennington and Birthisel, 2016). Much of the coverage also excluded statements from the victim or her representatives but rather focused on the digital evidence of the assault.

The news stories framed technology as a sort of “witness” to the assault, with a focus on the relatively new technology of smartphones as changing how crimes are investigated

(Pennington and Birthisel, 2016).

Several aspects of campus culture can contribute to the prevalence of sexual assault. Students can feel pressured to drink alcohol and go to parties in order to meet people and fit in with their peers, although because the party culture is central to many students’ college experiences, students can be hesitant to acknowledge its role in assault

(Armstrong et al., 2006). Students at parties are expected to make friends and trust the

13 other people there, and women reported that they had decided to not confront men who made them uncomfortable because they did not want to start trouble (Armstrong et al.,

2006). Blaming people who have been assaulted can also make students feel like they have more control over what happens to them (p. 493). A 2016 study found that students who drank heavily were more likely to blame assault victims for the assault, especially male students, who were more likely than the female students to hold those beliefs

(Hayes et al., 2016).

Sexual assault, especially campus assault, is often viewed as a “women’s issue” that affects female victims and is perpetrated by men. However, many who have researched the issue say that addressing assault requires all members of a community to work together to acknowledge how they may be enabling assault and what they can do to prevent it. Assault and rape should be addressed at the collective level, not the individual level, by emphasizing rape and assault as public health problems rather than personal issues (Godderis and Root, 2017; DeGrue et al., 2012; Somanader, 2014).

Student Journalists Covering Sexual Assault

Student journalists can face opposition from both university administrators and their peers for covering sexual assault because drawing attention to sexual violence on campus can cast a negative light on the institution. For example, the Kentucky Kernel, the University of Kentucky’s student newspaper, was sued by the university in 2016 after filing an open records request for documents pertaining to a sexual misconduct investigation of a former associate professor (Kirk, 2016). Although the accusers originally approached the Kernel and said they felt comfortable with what had been

14 published, they then sought to join the lawsuit, saying that they were worried the release of more documents could publicly identify them (March, 2016).

The University Press at Florida Atlantic University, however, faced more opposition from students after the newspaper covered a reported rape at a popular off- campus party when about 900 issues of the University Press were stolen (DeWulf, 2016).

In March 2016, the newspaper published a story about a previous assault that had been reported a year earlier at the 2015 South Florida Spill, an all-you-can-drink party held off campus and associated with but not explicitly hosted by the fraternity Omega Psi Phi.

The story was published before the 2016 South Florida Spill (Bloch, 2016b). Then editor-in-chief Emily Bloch, who also wrote the story, told the Student Press Law Center that she believes issues of the newspaper were stolen because of the article that showed connections between the fraternity and the South Florida Spill (DeWulf, 2016). The 2015 party had been held at the Wayne Barton Study Center, a facility two miles away from

FAU’s campus and owned by Wayne Barton, a former Boca Raton police officer. Barton told a University Press reporter who contacted him for a comment “look little girl please stay in your lane” and denied that a crime had occurred at the 2015 event (Bloch, 2016a).

Rolling Stone’s story “A Rape on Campus,” which was published in November

2014, highlighted at the but was ultimately discredited. The story gave a detailed account of a gang rape in a fraternity house at UVA and the university’s failure to hold the perpetrators accountable. The story quickly gained readership but had to be retracted when other news outlets noticed discrepancies in the story. The reporter, Sabrina Rubin Erdely, admitted that she had not contacted the

15 students that Jackie, the story’s main source, had accused of raping her. Erdely said she wanted to be sensitive towards Jackie, and although she had been slightly skeptical of the account—Jackie said she could not remember the alleged perpetrator’s exact name, for example—she believed that Jackie was only changing her story because of the trauma she was dealing with following her rape. Columbia Journalism Review, which published a report on the story’s ethical failures, said the mistakes were “avoidable.” It was argued that publishing a possibly false rape account also discredits survivors when they do try to report what has happened to them—“Erdely and her editors had hoped their investigation would sound an alarm about campus sexual assault and would challenge Virginia and other universities to do better. Instead, the magazine’s failure may have spread the idea that many women invent rape allegations” (Coronel, Coll & Kravitz, 2015).

The story included UVA dean Nicole Eramo, framing her as indifferent to students’ concerns about their safety. In 2015, Eramo sued Rolling Stone,

Erdely and publisher Wenner Media for $7.85 million. Eramo’s complaint cited the

Columbia report seven times, referring to interviews that the authors of the report did with Erdely. The complaint states that Erdely had concerns about Jackie’s credibility but chose to submit the story regardless, and that Erdely told Coll she chose UVA with the goal of portraying rape culture there to shock readers (Chow, 2015). The Columbia report does not state that Erdely broke the law but concludes that she fell short of professional ethical standards. However, Eramo was awarded $3 million in damages in November

2016 as a result of her defamation suit. Eramo said she received hundreds of emails

16 attacking her character and was reassigned to a different position at the university, losing a job she had loved (Shapiro, 2016).

Following the publication of the Rolling Stone article, , UVA’s student newspaper, published several letters to the editor. Members of , the fraternity accused in the article, wrote to condemn the behavior in the article and state that they would cooperate with criminal and university investigations (Phi Kappa Psi,

2014). A faculty member said the rape culture at the university described in the article was “a moral disaster of the first magnitude, not just a temporary PR glitch” (Arras,

2014). A student said the UVA culture did not condone rape, but society in general sent boys the message from a young age that women are objects (Hirtle, 2014). The Cavalier

Daily also published several news stories about the university’s reactions to the article, including UVA President Teresa Sullivan’s request for the Charlottesville Police

Department to investigate the alleged rape (Kaler, 2014), Sullivan’s suspension of fraternities (Heskett, 2014), and vandalism at the Phi Kappa Psi house (Elliott, 2014).

The newspaper highlighted university deans’ requests for feedback about how to address sexual assault (Gardner, 2014) and student activist groups’ work to prevent assault and help survivors (Mason, 2014). The newspaper’s managing board also published an editorial encouraging students who had been assaulted to come forward. Editors said they hoped the anger incited at UVA by the article would motivate students to change the culture and help normalize bystander intervention (Cavalier Daily Managing Board,

2014).

17 The Cavalier Daily followed up on the story when the Rolling Stone article came under scrutiny. The newspaper interviewed Jackie’s friends who were featured in the article, using their names rather than the Rolling Stone had published. One friend said the account in Rolling Stone differed from what Jackie had told him that night—the number of men involved had changed, for example. Another friend said she did not like how she was portrayed in the Rolling Stone article, which claimed she discouraged Jackie from going to the police. Two of the friends said Jackie had given them a phone number of the student she accused of assaulting her, but the two friends received different phone numbers (Elliott, 2014b). The newspaper also published a letter to the editor from Jackie’s former suitemate, who said she believed Jackie had been assaulted because she had noticed her acting differently (Clark, 2014). The Cavalier

Daily also followed up when Phi Kappa Psi was reinstated (Elliott, 2015).

Journalism Ethics When Covering Sexual Assault

Fairness and balance

Fairness and balance are values emphasized by many reporters and news organizations. While the terms fairness and balance are often used together or interchangeably, they are two distinct values referring to journalists’ behaviors and decisions throughout the reporting process. Fairness involves treating sources, audiences and colleagues with respect, while balance refers to seeking out and reporting multiple sides of a story—fairness deals with people, while balance applies to information

(Knowlton and Reader, 2009, p. 47). Fairness and balance are not binary concepts, and

18 journalists move on the continuum between unfair and unbalanced and, on the other end of the spectrum, fair and balanced as they navigate the reporting process (p. 47-48).

While balance is often seen as reporting “both” sides of the story, there are usually more than two sides to every story, although due to time and story length constrictions, limited viewpoints are presented. Journalists often report supporting and opposing viewpoints on an issue but do not speak to people with more moderate viewpoints, which could benefit readers by providing them with multiple perspectives so they can form their own opinions (Knowlton and Reader, 2009, p. 48-49).

Codes of ethics have become the standards that journalists at different news outlets can agree on, and most codes of ethics provide guidelines for fair and balanced coverage that is ethically defensible (Simon, Fico & Lacy, 1989). Balance is especially important in crime coverage, and journalists should not just report the law enforcement perspective on the story if they want to publish fair and balanced stories. Although the ’s side of the story is often reported in coverage of trials, journalists should make an effort at every step of covering a case to contact all parties involved. If someone cannot be reached for comment or declines to comment, that should also be reported (p.

433).

The Society of Professional Journalists’ Code of Ethics, which is widely used in both professional and student newsrooms throughout the U.S., emphasizes fairness and balance. One of the main principles of the code is “minimize harm,” and journalists are instructed to weigh the public’s need to know against harm, recognize that publically available information should not always be published, and “avoid pandering to lurid

19 curiosity, even if others do” (Society of Professional Journalists, 2014). In the case of sexual assault coverage, that would mean that journalists should contact someone who has been accused of assault to allow them to comment, rather than just offering the alleged victim’s perspective. Presenting the perspectives of all parties involved—or advocates for their positions—better enables readers to make a decision about where they stand (, ).

Journalists often feel a strong sense of loyalty to their profession and its shared norms, particularly a commitment to truth and accountability. While members of the journalist community have autonomy over their own behavior, they are held accountable by the profession and its expectation of truthful reporting (Singer, 2007). The Society of

Professional Journalists’ ethical code emphasizes both truth and independence (Society of

Professional Journalists, 2014), and journalists often collectively fight any to interfere with their independence (Singer, 2007). Journalists feel an obligation to inform the public by providing them with accurate information and being transparent about where that information is from and the extent of that knowledge (Singer, 2007). The concept of truth, especially in the field of journalism, has been challenged by the internet, where communicators do not interact in person and there is less of a distinction between

“professional” and “personal” communicators (Singer, 2007).

In crime coverage, fairness means presuming that the accused is innocent, and stories should not presume that the accused is guilty before there has been a trial. Sources should be given a reasonable amount of time to respond and offer a comment, especially if they are being portrayed in the story in a negative light, such as if they have been

20 accused of a crime. If the main source cannot be reached, efforts should be made to contact one of their representatives or another source who could advocate for them

(Reuters, Associated Press). With regard to campus-based sexual assaults, student journalists have the same ethical obligations to be fair toward the accused by rigorously offering the opportunity to comment, and including those comments (or lack thereof) in reports as a matter of balance.

Conflict of interest

Another ethical principle of journalism involves avoiding conflicts of interest.

Some tension between personal beliefs and professional obligations is inevitable, but journalists should not use their professional influence or position to serve their personal interests (Knowlton and Reader, 2009, p. 49). While some journalists may intentionally accept bribes or payment for coverage, most conflicts of interest are less malicious, such as when a journalist wants to protect a personal friend or family member (p. 49-50).

Many news companies have policies to avoid real or perceived conflicts of interest and restrict journalists’ political activities or involvement in community groups. Journalists can also avoid conflicts of interest by choosing not to report on stories in which they have a personal involvement, although this may be more difficult for journalists in smaller communities (p. 51).

Student journalists balance their roles as students and their jobs as journalists, covering the communities they also participate in through regular life activities. To help address conflicts of interest, many student newspapers and journalism schools have adopted their own codes of ethics, often adapted versions of ethical codes from

21 professional organizations such as the Society of Professional Journalists. Michigan State

University’s School of Journalism, for example, requires that opinion articles be clearly labeled as commentary rather than news reporting, and students are advised against using classmates, friends, roommates or family members as sources (Michigan State

University, 2013). Similarly, students working for student media at North Carolina State

University are advised to not cover student organizations that they are involved in, to not run for student government, and to not write an opinion piece about an issue they have also reported on for news coverage (NC State Student Media, 2017). As one former student journalist at the University of Richmond wrote, “college journalism is community-based journalism in its purest form: we write about the people we sit next to in class and the ones we see at parties on Friday night” (Flesher, 2006). Student journalists covering assault cases may be familiar with the people involved as friends, current or former classmates, friends-of-friends, and so forth, which are personal relationships that could create real or perceived conflicts of interest.

Sensitivity vs. the obligation to inform

The issue of sensitivity is especially relevant in stories such as sexual assault that are disturbing and involve suffering, and journalists should strive to balance their obligation to inform the public with the welfare of not only their sources but their audiences as well (Knowlton and Reader, 2009, p. 55). While certain disasters and crimes are newsworthy, and the public should be informed about them, journalists should report on those issues carefully. Journalists can find themselves in a double bind when deciding

22 how much information to share—“Show too little, be branded a coward; show too much, be branded a fiend” (p. 55).

For student journalists who cover campus sexual assault, the concept of sensitivity becomes even more complicated if the journalists themselves have had experiences with sexual assault, either themselves or via friends, colleagues, or family members. The Dart

Center for Journalism and Trauma offers several tips for students who want to approach sexual violence coverage with sensitivity. Students should educate themselves on the terminology about sexual violence—“rape” and “assault” are different terms, and some people will be skeptical of the word “victim” and prefer the term “survivor.” Journalists can also try to make their sources more comfortable by giving them freedom over how the interview is run — sources should be told that they can take a break whenever they need one or choose where the interview takes place, for example. Also, journalists should

“remember this situation is about a person” and focus on the human perspective in their writing (Dart Center for Journalism and Trauma).

The terms “victim” and “survivor” can possibly add bias to a story. NPR addressed that issue when it added guidance about assault to its ethics handbook in 2014.

NPR advises journalists not to prejudge the situation before there is a verdict or evidence—“Bear in mind that if there’s a victim/survivor, that means we’re telling our audience that there’s an attacker or attackers…When such stories begin, we’re typically dealing with allegations, not verdicts” (NPR, 2014). The NPR guidance suggests that journalists focus on the acts that have been reported rather than labeling people in relation to the reported incident. According to NPR, “She’s not a ‘rape survivor’ or ‘rape victim.’

23 She is a young woman ‘who was raped’ or whom ‘police say was sexually assaulted in her dorm room’” (National Public Radio, 2014). The Poynter Institute’s course on reporting on sexual violence advises against labeling perpetrators as “predators” or

“monsters” because it implies a “them vs. us” dynamic and may prevent people from seeing the warning signs of abusive behavior in people they know (Poynter Institute, n.d.).

Journalists in North Carolina faced several ethical challenges in the 2006 case of

Duke University lacrosse players who were accused of raping an exotic dancer they hired for a team party. After 46 players submitted DNA samples, three of them were charged with first-degree rape, first-degree sexual offense, and first-degree kidnapping

(Stevenson, 2006). The case attracted national media attention, with several national news outlets covering the story, including The New York Times, and CNN (Dewan, 2006; Holley and Sweezey, 2006; CNN, 2006). On April 11, 2007, the charges were dropped, with State Attorney General Roy Cooper citing a lack of evidence and inconsistencies in the woman’s account of the alleged assault (West, 2007).

A 2012 study analyzed coverage of the Duke case by professional journalists and found that many journalists relied on dichotomous emotional appeals when framing the story—“Mangum [the accuser] was either a hard-working single mother or a drunken slut who danced for money. The players were either boorish bullies or misunderstood victims” (Barnett, 2012, p. 22). Barnett’s study also focused on The New York Times,

The Washington Post, The (Durham) Herald-Sun and The (Raleigh) News & Observer, all staffed with professional journalists rather than students (p. 17). The study analyzed

24 how Mangum’s bipolar disorder and drug and alcohol use were mentioned in news coverage to frame Mangum as unstable and unreliable, although journalists could have also investigated that information to look at Mangum’s treatment in the legal system. The dancer’s background also was exposed, such as the fact that Mangum had previously filed rape charges in 1996 for an incident she said occurred in 1993, a delay that was framed as concerning (p. 20). Although the lacrosse players had also been drinking the night of the party, their alcohol consumption was not seen as negatively affecting their ability to remember the events of that night (p. 20). The lacrosse players’ past behaviors also were published, with many stories noting their previous campus judicial code violations and the team’s reputation on Duke’s campus as “elitist” and “privileged.”

Articles included in Barnett’s study detailed the sometimes contentious relationship between Duke students and Durham residents, some of whom had grown frustrated with living near college students’ loud parties (p. 21-22). Few of the stories included in the study looked at the crime of rape in the context of gender violence, the other 99 rape cases reported in Durham in 2006, or the impact of the case on victims reporting rape.

Duke reported seven forcible sex offenses in 2006, while the University of North

Carolina at Chapel Hill reported 12 and North Carolina State University reported three

(, 2008; University of North Carolina, 2009; North Carolina State

University, “Crimes Reported”).

For student journalists who cover such cases, strong initial emotions such as anger, disappointment, fear, and sadness can all cloud ethical judgment. There may be a tendency to presume guilt or find fault with the accuser, to sympathize with the accuser,

25 or to demonize the accused. Beyond maintaining fairness and balance, student journalists must also manage their personal emotions in assault cases, and try not to under-report important facts that are uncomfortable to share nor over-report unflattering, but titillating, trivia and gossip about those involved.

Journalists who cover sexual assault may feel traumatized or upset during the reporting process as they hear others’ accounts of assault, learn more about the issue, or confront their personal connections to the topic. If necessary, they should seek help from a mental health professional. They can also engage in self-care, take breaks from the story if possible, and spend time with a support network of friends, family or coworkers when they are struggling.

Privacy vs. the public’s right to know

Journalists frequently have to weigh the public’s right to know newsworthy information against the desire to maintain privacy for the individuals involved.

Information such as the debates and votes of public officials are newsworthy and can be useful information for the public, but when a public official’s personal life affects their work or could affect the community, that information is also newsworthy (Knowlton and

Reader, 2009, p. 52). However, information about private citizens’ lives is generally not useful to the public, even if it is public record such as a marriage license (p. 52-53).

Journalists can defend the public’s right to know by exercising their right to obtain public records and doing the work of finding the useful information in these sources, a task that can be time-consuming and is likely not of interest to most members of the public (p. 54).

26 However, there is often a difference between what the public has a right to know—or what is a matter of public record—and what the public needs or even wants to know. Journalists “cannot be governed simply by what [their] audiences demand,” and the audience may want to know information that would be inappropriate to share or would cause unnecessary harm if shared (Richardson, 2004, p. 54). Journalists need to decide what information could most benefit their audiences and provide accurate reports of what the public needs to know without pandering to what they may simply want to learn (p. 54). The media should not value vices, or what people want, over virtues, which are more beneficial and have more of a positive impact on society (Wilson and Denis,

2018).

Privacy concerns are relevant to sexual assault cases most often in regard to whether to publish the names of the accused and the accuser, which may be included in public police reports and other documents. Although this information may be public, it is a topic of debate among journalists whether to include these names in media reports.

In the United States, the decision of whether to print an accuser’s or victim’s name is an ethical question rather than a legal one. In 1975, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a Georgia law making it a to broadcast a rape victim’s name was unconstitutional, after the father of a deceased rape victim sued WSB-TV, an Atlanta station, when it aired his daughter’s name. The law was determined to be a threat to a free press because information about rape cases is already public record (Cox Broadcasting

Corp. v. Cohn, 1975). The U.S. Supreme Court also ruled a similar law in Florida

27 unconstitutional in 1989, stating that the statute was a violation of the First Amendment

(Florida Star v. B.J.F., 1989).

Although many news outlets have policies against naming victims of sexual assault and rape, journalists also vary on naming perpetrators and victims of other crimes.

In the United States, news media frequently identify individuals who are accused of crimes, sometimes even before the accused is arrested. A 1994 survey completed by 90 daily newspapers found that about one in five newspapers at the time would name a suspect after they received police reports, and 72.7 percent of newspapers named a suspect after an had been made. Almost all, or 97.8 percent, of the newspapers, reported that they named once the case had gone to trial (Thayer and Pasternack,

1994). The “perp walk,” in which the suspect in a crime, shortly after being arrested, is

“walked” in front of the press and is photographed and filmed, publicizes police efforts and can provide illustration for crime stories. The identification and spreading of images of a suspect, however, may label them as guilty before the trial and can permanently damage their reputation (Ruiz and Treadwell, 2002). The “perp walk” is illegal in France, where photographs of suspects in cannot be published (Sayare et al., 2011), and in Britain and France, suspects are often driven in vans with blacked out windows so that the media cannot photograph them (Jones, 2011).

The naming of accusers and victims is far less common, and doing so often raises several ethical dilemmas. The Online News Association recommends waiting until authorities have released the name of a crime victim rather than reporting information from other sources, so families can be notified (Online News Association, n.d.).

28 Reporting the name of someone who is facing intolerance, such as someone who is gay, or is an activist against government policies, may place them in further harm, according to the Online News Association. If someone is a public figure, that may warrant publishing their name, and there is also some debate among journalists about publishing the names of mass killers, so that potential copycats do not kill other people to gain attention (Online News Association). The guidelines usually differ for rape cases, due to the stigma of the crime, and news outlets should not identify accusers just because the case results in an acquittal (Online News Association, n.d.).

The case at Duke University showed how journalists both on and off campus react to campus rape cases and how their coverage can influence each other. When rape charges were dropped against the Duke lacrosse players in December 2006, several news outlets, including Fox News’ “The Big Story with John Gibson,” the Chicago Sun-Times, the Charlotte Observer and the , published the name of the accuser. The editor of the Raleigh News & Observer, which is located near Durham and published the accuser’s name, said that because both the players and the accuser claimed they had been harmed by the case, the newspaper may be seen as taking a side if they named the accused but not the accuser (Dadisman, 2007, p. 23). The Chronicle, Duke’s student newspaper, also published the accuser’s name in its coverage of the case. The Chronicle published an article about criticism of the Durham Herald-Sun’s coverage, which some accused of being biased against the lacrosse players, and Chronicle staff noted that the

Herald-Sun editor was a Duke alumnus and had worked for the Chronicle while in college (Eaglin, 2007). The Chronicle wrote a story about the same woman in 2010 after

29 she was charged with attempted murder, arson and assault following a domestic dispute, and that article identified her as “the woman who falsely accused three members of the men’s lacrosse team of rape in 2006” (Tracer, 2010).

Student newspapers at other nearby universities also covered the . The Technician at North Carolina State University reported that NCSU lacrosse players felt they were being judged because people were stereotyping lacrosse players as violent. The NCSU lacrosse players said most athletes did not get “out-of-hand” like the

Duke lacrosse players, although one player said that the Duke players had likely not had

“malicious intent” or racial motivations (Gordon, 2006). The newspaper published an editorial stating that the editors felt that defendants in rape cases were viewed as “guilty until proven innocent” and that the accused in rape cases were often treated unfairly (The

Technician, 2006). The Technician later followed up and talked to students about their reactions after DNA results did not match any of the lacrosse players (Hindi, 2006). The

Daily Tar Heel at the University of North Carolina also covered the case, with several articles covering various stages of the investigation, including the suspension of the team, searching of players’ residence halls, the resignation of the involved, and the DNA results (Daily Tar Heel Archives).

Community newspapers also cover sexual assaults that occur outside of college campuses and involve community members rather than students, and that coverage can set an example and influence how student journalists approach the issue. The Shelton-

Mason County Journal in Washington was known for its policy of naming all crime victims, even victims of sexual crimes. The newspaper’s policy attracted national

30 attention since the newspaper first identified a 12-year-old victim in 1898 and continued to name accusers (Riski and Grusin, 2003). The policy has since been discontinued because the newspaper changed ownership, so the Journal no longer names accusers in rape and assault cases (A. Rudnick, personal communication, 2017). The policy created tension in Mason County—the sheriff and county prosecutor tried to convince the newspaper’s publisher to change the policy because they feared it was discouraging victims from reporting to law enforcement, and nonprofit leaders and educators in the area said it hurt the people they worked with as well (Riski and Grusin, 2003). The newspaper, however, stood by its policy, with several publishers over time stating that it enabled the accused to have a fair trial. The Shelton-Mason County Journal published an editorial in 1978 in defense of the policy, which at the time was facing controversy—

“The Journal reports all major trials in Mason County. Our purpose is to transmit to readers a true picture of what transpired in the courtroom. In order to be fair and accurate, it is necessary that all principals be named…In any test of fairness, the rights of the accused must be considered equal to those of the accuser” (Shelton-Mason County

Journal, 1978).

A rape case involving a prominent public figure in 1991 also created discussion about naming accusers. NBC News identified the woman who had accused William

Kennedy Smith, nephew of Sen. Edward Kennedy, of rape. NBC leaders stated that they were following the lead of other outlets that identified the woman (Case, 1995). NBC

News president Michael Gartner justified the decision in a memo, stating that the suspect was named and the accuser should be treated equally. He also said that he believed that

31 refusing to name rape victims reinforced the stigma around rape and may make victims feel even more ashamed about what has happened to them (Gartner, 1991). When Gartner was invited to speak at a Society of Professional Journalists conference in 1995, many journalists questioned the invitation, with one journalist stating that Gartner had “done more to destroy journalism credibility than anyone else in the last few years” and should be condemned (Case, 1995).

A few years earlier, another prominent editor had also argued that only naming one party involved can be unethical. Geneva Overholser, former editor of the Des Moines

Register, expressed similar views as Gartner, saying that “we’ll never get rid of the stigma if we don’t treat these like regular crimes.” Only naming the accused makes it look like the newspaper is presuming that one party is innocent, while the other is guilty, which is not the responsibility of journalists, according to Overholser (Dadisman, 2007).

During Overholser’s tenure as editor of the Des Moines Register, she published an editorial in both the Register and The New York Times encouraging rape victims to allow themselves to be identified in the press. Overholser used AIDS and abortion as examples of issues that had come to light because many people, especially public figures, were willing to discuss their experiences. She argued that the “delicacy” used in reporting on rape can make rape seem like less of a violent crime—“Editors do not hesitate to name the victim of a murder attempt. Does not our very delicacy in dealing with rape victims subscribe to the idea that rape is a crime of sex rather than the crime of brutal violence that it really is?” (Overholser, 1989)

32 The Register then published a series of five front page stories detailing Nancy

Ziegenmeyer’s assault in the parking lot of a college and the 14-month long process leading to the conviction of Bobby Lee Smith for the rape. Ziegenmeyer wanted to share her experience because she agreed with Overholser that when survivors spoke about their assaults, it encouraged others to come forward. She spoke to reporter Jane Schorer more than 50 times for the series, which was published after the trial (Schorer, 1990). Five

Register editors reviewed the account of the rape before it was published, and some editors wanted to edit the graphic sexual language. Overholser insisted that “you can easily strip the story of its power if your squeamishness overcomes you” and restored the original language at the risk of being seen as graphic or gratuitous (Margolick, 1990).

The Register was criticized for fueling racial tension by highlighting a case in which the victim was white and the perpetrator was black. Editors at The Louisville Courier-

Journal, also owned by Gannett, canceled plans to run the series because they were worried about the racial issue (Margolick, 1990).

A group of editors, academics and victim’s rights advocates met in Fort Worth,

Texas, in 1994 for a seminar on sex crimes and the media, with the main goal of discussing those issues. The seminar did not result in a solution that could be applied to all stories on sex crimes—editors, academics and advocates all agreed that the issue was a complex one, and journalists had conflicting responsibilities to their sources and their audiences in many cases (“Sex in the Media,” 1994). Jay Black, then the Poynter-Jamison

Chair of Media Ethics at the University of South Florida, provided his commentary in the

Newspaper Research Journal, stating that the problems of covering rape cases had

33 become not just legal challenges, but ethical ones (Black, 1995). Black argued that each party’s rights should not be the sole focus of the debate, because there was no solution that would be completely equal for all involved—“The dialogue improves once stakeholders respectfully agree that the press and victims and the general public all lay legitimate claim to important rights. Indeed, there may not be an Aristotelian golden mean to be reached among the sets of such rights, so the dilemma will not be resolved if it goes no further than which rights should be compromised” (Black, 1995).

Listening to victims and their advocates can also help journalists address the issue of assault and learn how their coverage can affect their audiences. The Maine Coalition

Against Sexual Assault (MECASA), a victim’s rights nonprofit, began collaborating with the Bangor Daily News (BDN) in 2013 to produce news content that was more sensitive to victims and informative to the public. Newspaper staff went through training to learn how to interact with accusers and victims, and the newspaper began publishing information about resources for victims and those concerned about them with their stories about assaults. Two BDN staff members completed 80 hours of additional training and wrote about what they learned. BDN staff created a multimedia project about victims in

Maine and published 30 op-eds about sexual violence for Sexual Assault Awareness

Month. MECASA recommends that news organizations promote resources where people who have been assaulted can go for help. They also advise against the publication of an accuser’s name or identifying information (Courchesne and Rhoda, 2016).

People who report that they have been assaulted may be further traumatized if their names are published, according to a 1996 study. The study surveyed people who had

34 been identified as accusers in rape cases in the Winston-Salem Journal, a newspaper in

North Carolina that identified both the accuser and the accused in assault cases.

Researchers mailed surveys to 41 people who had been identified in stories, and 18 people responded. Fifteen of the 18 women said they were unaware of the Journal’s policy when they reported the assault to police, and three said they would not have reported the assault if they knew their name would be reported, while seven women said they were not certain of the decision they would have made (Haws and Ramsey, 1996).

One woman said having her name published affected her family and her sons, who were in their teens at the time—“Having all the kids at their school know about what happened made an already upsetting situation far worse. The increased psychological/emotional trauma for them was extremely disconcerting to me because something that happened to me was bringing so much embarrassment and heartache to them.” A woman surveyed said she felt like the Journal did not consider the consequences of their decision to print accusers’ names—“If a reporter would place himself/herself in the position of the rape victim or the victim's husband, I wonder how the story would then be reported? 'The

Story' follows the victim and the victim's family for the remainder of their lives” (Haws and Ramsey, 1996).

The ethical dilemma about naming rape accusers of course has also affected student news media. Unlike professional news outlets, many student-media outlets often are published under the authority of campus administration, which can exert pressures on student journalists that veteran journalists do not face. At public schools, administrations are prohibited by the First Amendment from confiscating copies of publications,

35 requiring prior review, removing objectionable material, suspending editors, limiting circulation, and withdrawing funding (Student Press Law Center, “Top 10 College

FAQ”). However, administrators can regulate the non-content aspects of student publications, such as hiring policies (Student Press Law Center, “Guide to Student Press

Freedom at Public Colleges”). At private schools, the administration may have more ability to censor, but many schools have policies about the administration’s control over student media. Student journalists can advocate to change those policies and make sure they are being followed (Student Press Law Center, “Guide for the Private School

Press”).

Universities may also tell student journalists that they cannot release information due to the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), which protects educational records from disclosure, as a way of obstructing student media. The relative ambiguity of the term “educational record” can make it difficult for student journalists to challenge their universities in some cases (Schick, 2014). The Student Press Law Center has begun an initiative encouraging student journalists to use FERPA to their own advantage, as it also requires universities to provide students with their own records within 45 days, and hold universities accountable if they use FERPA as an excuse to not release records to student journalists (Student Press Law Center, 2017).

For example, The Stallion, the student newspaper at Abraham Baldwin

Agricultural College in Georgia, was faced with the decision whether to publish a victim’s name with its “One in Four” story on sexual assault published in October 2015.

The student wanted her name published, but college administration discouraged The

36 Stallion from running her name, citing privacy concerns (Anonymous, 2015; Evans,

2015). Rather than simply obscure the accuser’s identity, The Stallion staff decided to black out the accuser’s name in the story to call attention to the college’s to meddle with the reporting.

A three-year study from 1997 of 92 journalism students at the University of Iowa found that students were aware of the debate surrounding identification of rape victims and the policy arguments both for and against identification (Karloff, 1997). Nearly a quarter of male students said that the names of accusers should be included in all cases, while one in 56 female students agreed. Nearly 70 percent of students said it is only acceptable to identify a victim of rape or assault if they have asked for or to being named, are well-known or have been murdered (Karloff, 1997). Although the focus of the study was on identifying victims, many students also expressed opposition to identifying those who have been accused of assault. One student said that identification in the press was harmful to the accused’s reputation—“The process of being accused of rape, or other sexual crimes, is irreversibly damaging to the accused person’s reputation and, in my opinion, an innocent ruling from a judge does not suffice or reverse the damage done by the press” (p. 13). Another student suggested that if the accused was later found innocent, the newspaper should report it just as openly as the original charges

(p. 13).

A September 1992 case at Marshall University in West Virginia showed the division between student journalists on the issue of identifying accusers in rape cases.

The Parthenon, the student newspaper at Marshall, published the name and address of a

37 woman who had reported that she had been raped by a student at Marshall, as well as the name and address of the student she accused. The seven-member editorial board had met to decide whether to publish the name, with the students voting 4-3 to publish it. Editor

Kevin D. Melrose said “it was a matter of fairness.” The staff wanted to treat rape coverage like coverage of other crimes and wanted to assume that the accused person may be innocent (Wolper, 1993). The accuser said seeing her name printed made her feel more vulnerable—she told the Huntington Herald-Dispatch, “I can safely say I hate the

Parthenon with the same passion as I hate the man who raped me. They endangered me by publishing my name and address for any crazy person to read and react to. I know of several girls who haven't reported rapes because they're afraid their names will be in the paper” (Wolper, 1993).

The editors also printed an editorial explaining why they decided to print information about both the accused and the accuser. The day after The Parthenon published the story, the accuser’s mother came to the newsroom with a letter to the editor condemning the decision to print her daughter’s name. In her letter, she wrote that she found the decision to be harmful and inconsiderate to the recovery of rape victims—

“Your pompous and naive editorial displays an utter lack of understanding of the process a rape victim must undertake through recovery. I pity you” (Wolper, 1993). J. Wade

Gilley, then-president of Marshall, said the newspaper had a “smut magazine mentality” and transferred control of The Parthenon to a new committee of non-journalism faculty and student representatives. Parthenon staff reversed their policy of naming rape victims the next semester under the leadership of a new editor (Wolper, 1993).

38 Jared Flesher, former editor of The Collegian at the University of Richmond, wrote for the Columbia Journalism Review about his decision to publish the name of a student who was accused of stalking his ex-girlfriend, but not the name of the accuser

(Flesher, 2006). He said as a member of the community he was writing about, he felt pressure to make the right decision that was most respectful of the campus community.

At first, he wanted to follow the journalistic rule of treating all parties equally by printing both names, but he realized that stalking may come with some of the same stigma and shame as sexual assault and spoke to both the accuser and her mother. Flesher said he is still not sure if he made the right decision as a journalist, but he felt at the time that printing the accuser’s name would cause more harm than good—“A true journalist would print both names. Instead, I went with my gut” (Flesher, 2006).

Experiences in student media prepare students to make ethical decisions as professional journalists in the field. A 2007 study found that introductory students in both print and broadcast journalism had the perception of more absolutist ethical standards than graduating students, whose views on ethical issues were shaped by their internships and work experiences. Students had fewer absolute ethical views as they gained professional experience (Reinardy and Moore, 2007). A similar study in 2002 found that both journalism students and professional news directors agreed that ethics is best learned through experience rather than theory. Students perceived ethical dilemmas such as staged events and influence of advertisers as being more serious than the news directors perceived the same issues (Hanson, 2002). Forsyth’s ethics position questionnaire evaluates people’s ethical idealism versus their ethical relativism, or their belief in less

39 absolute ethical views that are more situational. The questionnaire categorizes people into four ethical ideologies—situationism, which advocates for contextual analysis of actions; absolutism, which uses universal principles; subjectivism, which argues that judgments should be made based on one’s own values; and exceptionism, which argues that exceptions should be made to moral absolutes (Forsyth, 1980). Student journalists may have more absolute views on ethical issues than professional journalists do, and student journalists’ views may be shaped by their experiences working at student media.

A 2009 study surveyed student editors, student newspaper advisers, and university officials and found that the student editors were the only group to have significant concerns about . Private universities were more likely to be operating student newspapers without official guidelines and experienced more censorship issues than the public universities included in the survey. Student editors were more likely to self-censor if they felt they had less control over content in the newspaper. The study recommended that universities create official guidelines giving primary control over content to student editors and defining the role of advisers, with the goal of limiting self-censorship

(Bickham and Shin, 2009).

Student journalists’ relationships with their advisers could also influence their willingness to cover controversial issues such as sexual assault and how that coverage is handled. A 2012 study found that student newspaper editors were underestimating their advisers’ comfort levels with controversial topics, and their advisers would have been more supportive of students covering controversial stories than the editors believed they would be (Filak, 2012). That may be because advisers want to allow editors to make

40 decisions about coverage relatively independently and do not want to appear biased towards or against any particular story topics. Editors were found to be more willing to self-censor if they felt that their adviser would not support them, so it is likely that student newspapers may not be covering controversial issues because of a perceived lack of adviser support that is being exaggerated (p. 310).

Student journalists, like professionals, are expected to produce ethical and accurate work. That requires the values of balance, fairness, and minimizing harm, which can be especially difficult to apply to complicated issues like sexual assault. Because student journalists often transition into professional journalism—and student newsrooms serve as training grounds for the next generation of journalists—it is important to consider how they are being prepared to become ethical journalists. The issue of sexual assault is also timely, given its emergence as a topic of debate both on and off college campuses nationwide.

41 Research Questions

While previous studies have focused on student journalists’ ethical decision- making, there is little research on how student journalists implement their ethical obligations of fairness and balance when covering campus sexual assault specifically.

This study aims to explore the issue further by gathering student journalists’ firsthand accounts of their experiences covering sexual assault on their own campuses. The following research questions will guide the study.

RQ1: When covering sexual assault on their own campuses, how did student journalists implement their ethical obligation of fairness?

The first research question concerns the journalistic principle of fairness. Student journalists, like professionals, have an obligation to be as fair as possible toward the people and organizations they write about. For journalists, fairness means treating everyone they encounter equally and with respect (Knowlton and Reader, 2009, p. 47).

This study focuses on how student journalists strive for fairness in sexual assault coverage, which would include factors such as the of the accused, as well as treating the accuser and accused with compassion and respect, and being respectful of the emotional trauma all parties are experiencing.

RQ2: When covering sexual assault on their own campuses, how did student journalists implement their ethical obligations to be balanced?

This study focuses on how student journalists aim for balance, which refers to presenting multiple perspectives in news coverage and providing all parties involved with the opportunity to present their points of view (Knowlton and Reader, 2009, p. 47). In the

42 case of sexual assault coverage, balance would be to include statements from the accused, getting expert analysis from neutral sources rather than advocacy groups, and reporting when someone declines to comment or cannot be reached, detailing the legitimate attempts at contacting them or their representatives.

RQ3: When covering sexual assault on their own campuses, how did student journalists avoid conflict of interest and address conflicts they faced in their reporting?

Because student journalists are often active in their campus communities outside their roles with student media, it is possible that they encountered conflict of interest issues in their sexual assault reporting. They may know the accuser or accused, or they might be affiliated with a campus organization that is involved in the case. This research question focuses on how student journalists confront their conflict of interest dilemmas and reconcile their own personal connections and beliefs with their goal to remain objective in their reporting.

RQ4: When covering sexual assault allegations on their own campuses, how did student journalists implement their ethical obligations to evaluate subjects’ desire for privacy against the public’s right to know?

This research question addresses the decisions student journalists made about what information to publish in the case of sexual assault allegations, and why they made those decisions. Journalists weigh the public’s right to know about potential safety risks in their communities with privacy of the accused and the accuser, as well as the presumption of innocence of the accused. Journalists also have to decide what the public needs to know versus what they simply want to know because of their curiosity

43 (Richardson, 2004). Although it would be difficult to find the perfect solution to that dilemma (Black, 1995), this study hopes to gain the perspective of student journalists, who are at the beginning of their careers and less experienced in finding this balance.

RQ5: When covering sexual assault allegations on their own campuses, how did student journalists manage their personal sensitivities against their responsibility to inform the public of important information?

The fifth research question is focused on the journalists’ own hesitations and doubts in the reporting process—whether they personally feel comfortable with publishing certain information, reaching out to a source, or asking a difficult question.

44 Method

This thesis uses qualitative interviews as the primary research method, and qualitative textual analysis as a secondary method. This study identifies and includes interviews with 20 current or former student journalists who covered sexual assault for campus media. April 2011 was chosen as the starting date because that is when the much- debated “Dear Colleague” letter on campus assault was published by the U.S. Department of Education, which sparked expanded attention to the issue of sexual assault on college campuses. In summary, the research begins with Internet and social-media searches to identify student reporters and student editors who were involved in coverage of specific incidents of campus sexual assault. A purposive sample was used to ensure the sample was diverse in terms of gender, institutional types (public and private), and community

(urban, rural, and suburban campuses). Interviews were conducted via telephone.

Interviews were recorded with the subjects’ consent, and if the subject preferred to not be recorded, the researcher took hand-written notes. The number of interviews was not pre- determined; rather, successive interviews were conducted until the point of saturation — the point at which additional subjects gave essentially the same answers to the structured interview questions (Mason, 2010).

Detailed justifications for the research methods are provided below, followed by a detailed description of the interview questions used for this study.

Identifying Potential Research Subjects and Refining Research Questions

To identify potential research subjects and to guide the creation of specific research questions, this research started by reviewing published news reports and social-

45 media posts related to sexual assault cases on college campuses. That approach is consistent with several published studies. For example, a 2015 study included interviews with journalists and feminist activists about their communication on following the 2012 gang rape of a woman in New Delhi, India (Poell and Rajagopalan, 2015).

Journalists were found by searching for hashtags on Twitter associated with the incident, then identifying the journalists, both independent writers and those affiliated with an

Indian news organization (p. 722). Seven journalists and bloggers, as well as eight activists, were interviewed via Skype and were identified by name and occupation in the published study (p. 723). Previously, a 2008 study focused on one television station’s coverage of a sexual assault controversy at an unidentified private American college and included an interview with the producer who oversaw the story (Worthington, 2008). The researcher viewed the footage several times and conducted a thematic analysis before deciding on questions to ask the producer. After noting the frames used in the coverage, the researcher conducted an hour-long, semi-structured interview with the producer about how newsroom culture and story resources had shaped those frames (p. 5).

The qualitative interview method is commonly used for studies of professional practice, including practices in the field of journalism, and interviews can be useful in learning about the decision-making processes of professionals (Lindlof & Taylor, 2011).

Subject Recruitment

In addition, this study used snowball sampling to further identify and recruit potential subjects. “Snowball sampling” (also known as “referral sampling” or

“respondent-driven sampling”) is a sampling method by which research subjects either

46 recommend other potential subjects to the researcher or, in some cases, recruit additional subjects directly (Salganik & Heckathorn, 2004). A 2015 study used qualitative interviews with health journalists about role perceptions (Hinnant et. al., 2015). The study used snowball sampling from lists of award winners from the Association of Health Care

Journalists. In the study of health-care journalists (Hinnant et al., 2015), practitioners of varying experience levels (from 5 to 37 years) were asked about the challenges they faced when covering certain issues, as well as some of the problems they saw with healthcare coverage and their solutions to the problems (p. 768). The researchers used several categories to define how journalists saw their roles and analyzed their findings using those categories (p. 768-769). A different 2017 study used interviews to determine travel journalists’ sense of identity in the context of the rise of travel bloggers (Pirolli, 2017).

That study also utilized snowball sampling, with researchers asking journalists to refer them to colleagues who also wrote about travel (p. 744). The in-person interviews for the study lasted one to two hours each (p. 744). Another 2017 study included interviews with three British journalists who had covered sexual abuse of children, and the journalists described their difficulties finding sources, or getting those sources, particularly law enforcement, to speak on the record about the abuse cases (Niblok and Bindel, 2017).

The journalists were asked about several factors that may have affected their coverage, including whether competing media outlets had covered the story and if they had followed competitors’ coverage, which sources the journalists had contacted and who had agreed to speak (while allowing journalists to keep vulnerable sources anonymous), organizational pressures journalists faced and whether their stories had been heavily

47 edited, and the amount of time the journalists had been given by their editors to write the stories (p. 580). A review of the literature shows that the sampling method used for this study is consistent with several earlier studies of journalism practice that also looked at journalists’ perceptions of their roles and decision-making processes.

Qualitative Interviewing and Subject Debriefing

Interviews with journalists have been used to gather information that cannot be obtained through other methods; to verify or expand upon information from other sources; and to understand the source’s knowledge and worldviews and how those affect their work (Lindlof & Taylor, 2011). Interviews also provide insight into how journalists explain and justify their ethical decisions, and whether their ethical frameworks were influenced by the work of other journalists, both students and professionals—“how a group of people created a philosophy or cultural logic; how they apply this framework to situations, issues, or dilemmas” (Lindlof & Taylor, 2011, p. 174). In fact, several foundational research projects in journalism studies used the method of scholarly interviews. One example is Warren Breed’s 1955 study “Social Control in the

Newsroom: A Functional Analysis.” Breed interviewed 120 journalists from around the country about how they learned their newsrooms’ unofficial policies. Breed did not select journalists or newspapers randomly, although he did not purposely exclude or include any particular journalist or newspaper, and no one denied his request for an interview

(Breed, 1955, p. 328). The newspapers were chosen because they had a mid-range circulation of 10,000 to 100,000, and the length of the interviews averaged more than an hour each (p. 328). Another foundational study that used interviews was the first

48 “journalism gatekeeping” study, was by David Manning White (1950). White’s study,

“The Gate Keeper,” was based on interviews with one unidentified newspaper editor,

“Mr. Gates,” about his decisions regarding which stories to publish (White, 1950). The study set the stage for decades of interview-based research into journalistic gatekeeping

(Shoemaker and Vos, 2009), and, in the internet age, to more complex concepts such as

“network gatekeeping theory,” which considers the complex relationships among gatekeepers and between the gatekeepers and the “gated” (Barzilai-Nahon, 2008, p. 1498) and “gatewatching,” which suggests the internet gatekeepers could be redefined as

“librarians” who acquire as much information as possible and then point their audiences toward content they want (Bruns, 2005).

Several more recent studies have used interview-based methods to study how journalists view their own roles and responsibilities, and how they make decisions to fulfill those roles and responsibilities. A 2010 study involved interviews with 19 journalists about their coverage of “deliberative events,” such as public forums where community members gathered to offer solutions to a problem (Besley and Roberts, 2010).

The interviews for that study lasted an average of 20 minutes each, which is short for a qualitative interview, although the researchers noted that shorter interviews were warranted because journalists work on deadline and have limited free time (p. 71). To identify potential research subjects, the researchers found articles about public deliberation through the Lexis Nexis database, and they sent the journalists the articles they had written so they could more easily recall details for the interview (p. 71).

Participants were promised anonymity, so any identifying details about their work were

49 not included in the study (p. 71). The researchers then used text-analysis software to categorize journalists’ responses (p. 71). Other examples include a 2017 study on how journalists represent themselves both professionally and personally on social media

(Bossio and Sacco, 2017), a 2014 study about working conditions for interns and freelancing journalists (Gollmitzer, 2014), and a 2017 study that included interviews with journalists about their interactions with online commenters (Chen and Pain, 2017).

This thesis also included debriefing of study participants as an added measure to minimize potential harm. Covering sexual assault and other violent crimes can be emotionally difficult for the journalists involved, a topic explored in a 2007 study that included qualitative interviews with students who had covered a death penalty murder trial (Dworznik and Grubb, 2007). Interviews lasted from 45 minutes to an hour, and students provided written permission for their interview to be audio recorded and transcribed. After the interviews, students were provided with literature about traumatic stress and contact numbers for counselors (p. 196). For this thesis, a similar debriefing protocol is used. Participants were referred to the Dart Center for Journalism and Trauma, which has several resources for journalists experiencing trauma, and were given the Dart

Center’s tip sheet for journalists experiencing stress and trauma due to investigative projects, which discusses symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder and offers coping strategies (Dart Center, 2015).

Interview Protocols: Priming, Structured, and Unstructured Questions

The interviews followed a three-tiered questionnaire that started with a few priming questions, followed by a set of structured questions, and concluding with more

50 open-ended questions, similar to the approach used by Reader (2006). During the interviews, respondents were first asked about the sexual assault stories their newspaper published while they were on staff and how their newspaper’s coverage compared to the coverage of off-campus media sources. Participants were also asked what factors affected their ethical decision-making. Those questions utilized the concept of semantic priming, which is when a person more quickly or accurately responds to a stimulus if they have recently been exposed to a similar stimulus (McNamara, 2005).

The second set of questions was more structured and focused specifically on the normative aspects of each newspaper’s sexual assault coverage. The participants were asked how they implemented their obligations to be fair and to be balanced, and how they made decisions about privacy and the public’s right to know and sensitivity and their obligation to inform. Participants were also asked if they faced any conflicts of interest in the reporting process, such as personal relationships with those involved in the matter.

The third set of questions was more open-ended and asked respondents to describe what major ethical challenges they had faced in the coverage. Finally, they were asked about their main “takeaways” from covering campus sexual assault, and if they felt they had learned anything about ethical decision-making that they would apply to future stories.

51

Results

For this thesis, I interviewed 20 student journalists from 20 different universities in the United States. One other participant was interviewed, but the interview was excluded from the results because of poor audio quality in the recording. Ten of the universities were public and 10 were private. Three were in the Northeast, three in the

Southeast, 10 in the Midwest, two in the Southwest, and two in the Pacific region.

Participants include 15 women and five men. All worked for campus newspapers. One was a reporter, 10 were sub-editors, and nine were editors in chief. Eighteen of the participants were still working as student journalists at the time they were interviewed, and two had graduated in the previous year. I spent an average of 26 minutes interviewing each participant.

The results of those interviews are summarized below, grouped according to the research questions described in the Method section.

RQ1: When covering sexual assault on their own campuses, how did student journalists implement their ethical obligation of fairness?

All 20 participants interviewed for this study expressed concerns about fairness in some manner, such as statements that they made efforts to treat sources fairly, both the accused and the accusers, as well as university administrators and members of local law enforcement. Such expressions touched on issues such as trying to avoid prejudice

(“presumption of innocence”); persistent efforts to offer the accused the opportunity to

52 comment; efforts to afford administrators the opportunity to respond to outside criticisms; and sensitivity toward the alleged victims.

One example of fairness in crime coverage is presumption of innocence of the accused, and two participants reported that they had personally had doubts about the cases they covered. One of these students spoke with the accused and said he remained respectful during the interview. Both of these participants said they knew their role as journalists was not to judge whether the accused had committed the assault but rather to remain respectful during the interview and give the accused the opportunity to be heard.

Examples of “presumption of innocence” were common. “We were never looking to draw a conclusion in the case,” said one editor-in-chief who had recently completed an investigative piece. “We just wanted to learn what it was like to experience being accused of something, and in some cases, maybe being wrongfully accused of something.”

Another participant said that he told the accused student he spoke with that he was not trying to determine guilt or innocence, and he felt like the interview went relatively well:

“To me, it doesn’t matter if I think they’re guilty or not…He called me up and essentially what I said to him was, I’m not law enforcement, I’m not a judge, I have only your word and her word to go on. I’m just a journalist trying to tell the story. I told him, ‘Tell me your side of the story.’ He actually seemed to loosen up a little bit.”

When the accused were not so forthcoming, four participants also said that they made continued efforts to reach out to the accused for comment. One former managing editor from a large private university, for example, said she contacted the accused students several times over Facebook and email in an attempt to be fair to them—“We’re

53 accusing them of a really heinous crime. We didn’t want to put the story out there without at least trying to contact them in multiple ways in multiple instances,” she said.

However, five participants said that accused students usually either ignored attempts to contact them or declined to comment for the story. “In general, people haven’t taken us up on those offers when they’re the accused. I don’t know if there’s confidentiality concerns or they just don’t want to respond,” said one section editor from a mid-sized private university. When they could not reach the accused, most participants said they did not publish their names, with the exception of students who had been arrested and, as such, their names were a matter of public record.

Fourteen of the participants said they had spoken to members of administration and other university employees who were involved in the handling of assault cases.

However, in the interviews for this study, they spent more time discussing their interactions with other students. Participants said that the universities’ handling of assault cases was often criticized by other sources, so the student journalists felt the need to speak with representatives from the universities. Participants said they reached out to university officials in various roles, including Title IX officers and coordinators, deans, faculty members, and campus police or security officers. Similar to their attempts to contact the accused, participants said they made several efforts to contact university officials if needed, a process that sometimes took many hours or even days. For example, one participant said, “We didn’t contact them at 2:30 on a Friday…We’d contact them at the beginning of the week so they would have enough time to issue a statement or comment or let me talk to someone.”

54 While attempts at fairness in participants’ interactions with the accused and administration were mostly driven by the desire to follow journalistic routines, participants seemed more concerned about their stories’ emotional impact on the students who had allegedly been assaulted.

In an attempt at being fair toward allegedly assaulted students and minimizing harm, six participants said they gave the alleged victims more control over the pace and direction of the interviews. While most participants said they generally tried to avoid using anonymous sources, they made an exception for the accusers. Eight participants also said that they did not print details about the assaults if the students were not comfortable with going public. For example, a student from a mid-sized private university said, “There can be some fairly graphic details and a lot of times a survivor won’t want all those details published…Community members might want to know someone’s name or the details of an assault, but ultimately the policy we follow is that what they’re comfortable with is what we’re going to print.”

The participants were mindful of how their sensitivity during the interview could affect their sources—“There’s nothing worse than going into an interview in any instance and being unprepared, but especially when dealing with sexual assault and sexual violence or any kind of misconduct in that capacity, the words that you choose to use, the way you ask the question, or the way the interview goes, can be triggering,” one section editor said. Another participant said he knew that female sources who had been assaulted would likely feel more comfortable speaking with women, so he ensured that a female coworker was with him during his interviews. “I’m aware that these [assaults] are

55 primarily done by men and I’m aware of how that could make [a woman] feel when they’re being interviewed by a man,” he said.

RQ2: When covering sexual assault on their own campuses, how did student journalists implement their ethical obligations to be balanced?

All 20 participants discussed their efforts to keep their coverage balanced by seeking multiple perspectives on the issues they were covering. Some participants conflated the concepts of fairness and balance and discussed their attempts at balance when asked about fairness, and vice versa.

Participants said the most important method for keeping their coverage balanced was to speak to as many people as possible in order to hear several perspectives about the issue or the case. That aligns with common definitions of journalistic balance.

Participants said they spoke to students who reported assaults, the accused when possible, administrators, advocates and nonprofit leaders, lawyers, and friends of both the accused and of the accusers. They sought out those perspectives both to make their coverage more balanced and to corroborate information from other sources. One student journalist said she had spoken to several alumni who had negative experiences while they were students, and those alumni demonstrated the continuing nature of the problem.

Three participants said that, throughout the reporting process, they realized the complexity of the issue and understood that their universities were limited in how could they respond to assault reports, although participants were still frustrated with the prevalence of assaults.

56 For example, one editor from a small private Christian university said a student accused of assault approached her asking if she could write a story about his case. The student was a football player, and the football team is held in high esteem on campus. She was also surprised that he wanted to speak to a journalist, so she agreed to the story. The participant said the accused student referred her to people who could vouch for his character, and she asked those sources about him in an attempt to learn more about him.

“He was trying to make himself look good when he talked to me, so he said ‘everyone thinks I have great character and I’m a very godly person, and I go to church,’” she said.

“I said I need to talk to someone who can confirm that … I talked to his professor, who was actually his Bible professor and his mentor, and he’s a very well-known professor on campus. Getting [the professor’s] side helped to balance that out and confirm that what

[the accused] was saying was true, what he said about going to church.”

In another expression of “balance,” three participants emphasized the importance of not assuming that all students on campus agree with each other about such issues. One editor, for example, said reporters noticed at a public forum about a professor’s reported misconduct that some students were afraid to speak up because they disagreed with protestors at the forum. The newspaper profiled those students to offer a new perspective on their university’s misconduct controversy. Reporters spoke with students who supported administration and students who were critical of the university, the editor said.

Another student journalist said it was important to her that male students were included in her coverage about the university’s new misconduct policy—“I feel like a lot of times, with sexual assault, we tend to focus on women, but we have to remember that men also

57 obviously play a huge role in sexual assault on either side of the spectrum,” she said. A third participant noted that she felt the diversity of the staff in her newsroom had allowed the staff to better represent different segments of the community.

Another approach to “balance” can involve external research. Three participants whose reporting focused on their universities’ misconduct policies said they either researched other universities’ policies or spoke with people at other universities to learn more about how those schools handle assault cases. The participants said that information would help readers evaluate how their universities were addressing the issue of campus assault.

RQ3: When covering sexual assault on their own campuses, how did student journalists avoid conflict of interest and address conflicts they faced in their reporting?

Sixteen of the participants interviewed said they or their staff had faced conflicts of interest while reporting on sexual assault. The four students who said they had not encountered conflicts said they had not known anyone involved in the story, and their newspapers had policies forbidding staff members from interviewing people they already knew.

Many participants, especially those from smaller universities, said that even if they or their coworkers did not directly know the people involved in the stories, they might know the people’s friends, and it was hard to completely avoid those connections.

“I don’t know this person from campus, I’ve never met this person, but she has friends that I know, or that guy has friends that I know,” one participant said. “What if it gets to them that I did an interview? On a college campus, it’s a lot of ‘six degrees of

58 [separation].’” Eight participants said that, in many cases, assignments were shifted so that reporters could avoid conflicts of interest.

In one example of such a conflict of interest, an editor-in-chief from a mid-sized public university said that, at the time she was working on her newspaper’s investigative piece on sexual assault, she also was president of her sorority. Two of her sorority sisters came forward and wanted to share their stories of assault, but they were only willing to be interviewed by their friend. The participant said she did not want to write about her sorority sisters because it would be a conflict of interest, but she worried that their stories would not be told otherwise. One of the students had been assaulted only weeks before, and the participant had supported her since finding out about the assault. “She only trusted me with it, because when we found out what happened to her, I was there every step of the way with her…I know that in the beginning, it was a huge conflict of interest, but I eventually convinced her to tell her story to a different reporter but with me in the room,” the participant said. “It took a lot of conversations, but I told her that if she would only allow me to write the story, it wouldn’t have been published.”

Another participant said he had written a story about one of his friends, and while he was not at the party where the alleged assault occurred, he was close with the student who reported it. He was aware of the conflict of interest but sought advice from professionals about how to make his story less biased. “There was a conflict of interest there … I could have been tailoring the piece to benefit her more, but I worked with journalists from (local papers) and we made sure before the piece was published that it was absent of any sort of inherent bias,” he said.

59 Other participants said they believed it was difficult to not have some sort of conflict of interest due to the nature and prevalence of the crime of sexual assault, especially on college campuses. Participants said they often felt angry about their universities’ alleged negligence in handling assault cases, and because they were also students, they worried for their own safety. “As a female student on campus, I have skin in the game,” one section editor from a large public university said. “I care about fellow female students, I care about my own safety, and so there are times that I had to remember that just because something seemed unfair or because a situation seemed to be mishandled, that the university or law enforcement could always have a reason.”

RQ4: When covering sexual assault allegations on their own campuses, how did student journalists implement their ethical obligations to evaluate subjects’ desire for privacy against the public’s right to know?

All 20 participants said they had considered the privacy of people involved in their stories, and they were particularly concerned about protecting privacy of the alleged victims. They said they considered sources’ privacy by asking them what information could be shared publicly and by reporting on information that was already public record.

Eleven participants said they were mindful about the possible consequences of identifying either the accused or accuser in sexual assault cases—“a quick Google search can bring up someone’s name and we don’t want them to have that attached to them if they don’t want it,” one participant said. Some participants said they gave students who had been allegedly assaulted the option to remain anonymous or to be identified by only a class year or major, an exception to their newspapers’ rules against using anonymous

60 sources. Those participants who dealt with accused students said the accused were only identified if the case was a matter of public record because they had been charged with a crime.

Eight participants reported that they had sometimes felt conflicted about how many details of the alleged assault to include in their reporting—they wanted to accurately describe the situation without exploiting their sources. They said they often discussed with the allegedly assaulted students what information they were comfortable sharing both during the interview and in the newspaper. “We could print, ‘She’s accusing this guy of sexual assault,’ but is that too vague? I know in some cases, we’ve said she’s accusing him of penetration without consent,” one participant said. “It’s kind of getting around how do you portray this so people get what you’re talking about, but while still remaining sensitive to the survivors?” He said he avoided violating his sources’ privacy by shifting the focus of his story to the university’s handling of assault cases—“To us, that’s the more compelling story, the university’s seeming incompetency in investigating sexual assault cases, not the salacious details of what happened,” he said.

Three other participants noted that they connected individual cases to the larger issue of campus assault as a way to both properly inform readers and avoid exploiting individual sources. “When we can, I like to take things a little bit more big picture, giving people an idea of how many reports have been made, where those reports have been made, what the process looks like when people report to the university, what people are saying when they speak out about sexual assault on campus,” one participant said.

Another participant, whose reporting focused on her university’s policies rather than an

61 individual case, said that “you don’t have to report names to report the risk and the challenges students have to face in fighting that risk.”

However, in one case, a participant said she decided to include a detail the accused was not comfortable with publishing because she felt like it was essential to readers’ understanding of the incident. The editor-in-chief at a small private university said an accused student approached her and asked that his story be told. He told her on the record that he had had sex with the student who was accusing him but said it was consensual. Before the story was published, he asked the participant to remove that detail from the story. She kept it in. “Even though it’s kind of a private thing that he actually slept with her, it’s still very important to the case because it was a matter of consent and whether or not she consented,” she said. “To keep it secret that he had actually slept with her, I felt that would keep the truth out of the story…it was like the truth was a little more important than his privacy.”

Four participants said that when a case was already public record, they did not have privacy concerns about publishing that public information. One participant, a reporter from a large public university, wrote about a former accused student who was suing his university. Because the lawsuit was public, the participant did not have privacy concerns about the story. “We kind of thought, this is already out there. By covering this case, we’re not going to be sending any more attention their way that wasn’t already on them,” the participant said. However, his newspaper did decide not to publish photos included in public documents because they were worried that readers could identify the people in the photos. Another participant, an editor-in-chief from a large private

62 university who had covered the sentencing of a former student charged with sexual assault, said that when cases reached the court system, they were both a matter of public record and public interest. “When it gets to that level, I think it’s valid for the community to need to know what’s happening,” she said.

RQ5: When covering sexual assault allegations on their own campuses, how did student journalists manage their personal sensitivities against their responsibility to inform the public of important information?

All 20 participants interviewed for this study said they had experienced at least some personal emotions throughout the reporting process, and participants who had interviewed allegedly assaulted students had been especially aware of their emotional reactions to the issue of sexual assault.

Participants described sexual assault as an objectively heinous crime, and they said they often struggled to remain unbiased in their reporting because they were angry when they heard about assault on their campuses. As one editor said, “the conflict of interest is being human.”

Another student from a small private college said she frequently had to switch between her various roles to detach herself from her emotional connection to the issue—

“It’s really difficult as a student journalist to put on different hats, like I’m a student now, but I’m also doing this as my job, but I’m also doing this as a member of our community.” However, she said that, during interviews with students about their assaults, she had to control her impulse to be angry about the injustice she felt was occurring. “I

63 feel a responsibility to do something to serve you and help you. What can I do? Can I get this guy?” she said.

Ten participants also said that they were either directly or indirectly familiar with the issue of campus assault, and knowing people who had been involved in such cases made them realize the gravity of the issue. They were then motivated to investigate assault on their campuses with the goal of helping students who had been assaulted.

“When I’m thinking of stories I want to write or projects I want to tackle, I’m thinking of friends who have gone through this and gone to campus resources,” one former editor said. “I’ve seen some of the systems on campus fail people [who] I know well.” Another participant, who said she had been assaulted herself, said it was difficult to not project her own feelings and experiences while covering the issue. She addressed her feelings of internal conflict by reminding herself that “everybody’s story is distinct and separate” and that she should not compare her own experience to her sources’ stories.

Three participants said they struggled with their personal views about the guilt of the accused. “I was so nervous to talk to these people, because these guys, based off what

I’ve heard, I didn’t think our survivor was lying…I’m going in with ‘This probably went down how it’s been portrayed,’” one participant said. Another participant, who attended a large public university, covered a male student accused of assault whose suspension was overturned. It was difficult to avoid thinking about whether the student had gotten away with a crime, the participant said: “That could mean he’s innocent, that could mean he just got away, it wasn’t really up for me to decide…That was probably for me the toughest thing to reckon with, was thinking that the impact that this article might have in

64 terms of getting someone’s name cleared where I’m not really sure if his name should be cleared or not.”

Twelve participants said that consulting advisors, lawyers, professors, professional journalists, and fellow student journalists and asking for advice helped them check if these personal sensitivities were evident in their work. One editor-in-chief, for example, who said several people in her newsroom had had personal experiences with assault, said her staff consulted each other about how they approached their coverage.

“We always had another person to bounce ideas off or say ‘Hey, am I thinking about all sides here? Is my past experience with sexual assault different from yours and is that changing how we think about this story?’” she said.

All 20 participants in this study said they had been emotionally affected by their reporting on sexual assault. The student journalists who had interacted with accusers said those interactions had been especially emotional. The majority of participants also emphasized the importance of having a support network, both for help in dealing with emotional trauma and for asking for advice about ethical decisions.

The majority of participants said they or other student journalists at their newspapers had experienced conflicts of interest when covering campus assault. They often spoke of their roles as students and friends who were affected by the issue of assault just like other students in their campus communities, and half the participants said they or a friend had been assaulted. Many of the participants said their conflicts of interest were tied to their personal sensitivities because of those connections. A minority of students

65 said they had experienced assault themselves—two of them disclosed that fact, and they both said covering assault reminded them of their own experiences.

All the participants said they had made efforts to be both fair and balanced. Their efforts at maintaining journalistic balance aligned with common ethical rules of contacting all parties involved and seeking out multiple perspectives for each story.

Although the participants had followed many standard ethical practices, their positions as both students and journalists created distinct conflicts for some of them.

66 Discussion

The current and former student journalists included in this study faced many of the same ethical challenges faced by professional journalists covering assault, such as balancing the public’s right to know with the privacy of sources, emotional connections to the issue and trauma in reporting, and concerns about objectivity. They also followed many of the same ethical tenets as professional journalists would adhere to, such as avoiding conflicts of interest and fact-checking sources.

Even though they were college students at the time of their work, study participants said they were aware of basic journalistic ethics at the time and, during their coverage, considered such ethical principles as avoiding conflicts of interest, remaining fair and balanced, separating their personal sensitivities from their coverage, and balancing their communities’ right to know against the privacy of their sources. Although many of the participants were journalism students, they also mentioned learning about ethics through their previous work with student media and through mentorship from student editors. That is consistent with findings of past research, which determined that journalism students often learn about ethics through firsthand experience rather than from learning about theory (Reinardy and Moore, 2007; Hanson, 2002). There is an extent to which formal training in “media ethics” also can reinforce more dogmatic, simplified approaches to ethical decision making among student journalists. In a 2009 article, three journalism professors discussed how they had incorporated feminist values into their teaching about ethics. They decided they wanted to be more realistic with their students about how it was not always possible to completely detach themselves from their stories

67 — “we cringe at some of the things we tell students: write with detachment, always use third-person, use the inverted pyramid to tell your stories, take yourself out of the story.

We admitted even we don’t believe some of the instructions we give students, but we often feel we have to tell students these things because of journalistic professional standards and also because our departments tell us to” (Walker et al., 2009, p. 177). One professor said, when she talked to her students about how they could use their work to give a voice to underrepresented people, students found it difficult to reconcile that idea with what they had already been taught about straightforward, objective reporting, even though “the truth” can be a “contested terrain” (p. 179). Another professor said students should learn to identify their biases and think about all the different perspectives they can consider: “In journalism, reflexivity might result in a more accurate and authentic story, not just a story in which all the facts are right,” she said (p. 187).

To an extent, participants in this current study seemed to do just that – seek other ethical perspectives and question their own biases. Many said they had spoken with their coworkers and advisors, as well as reflected on their own personal experiences and those of their friends, to identify what their biases may be. They then tried to find people who may have different viewpoints in order to diversify their coverage. Still, they did struggle to detach themselves from their stories, an issue Walker et. al. (2009) said they had noticed with their students. While journalists are committed to the truth, they value pursuing the truth without external control over those efforts, although they often feel a sense of obligation to the profession, an ethical code, or their employer during the process

(Singer, 2007, p. 86).

68 However, student journalists’ complicated roles as both journalists and members of the campus community proved challenging as they navigated their assault reporting because they often sympathized with sources who reminded them of themselves and their friends. As they struggled with the difficult ethical questions involved in assault reporting, they often sought advice from each other and their advisers while keeping their existing knowledge of basic journalistic ethics in mind. A far more difficult challenge for them appeared to be their internal struggles to deal with their sympathy for the alleged victims of assault.

Objectivity in Covering Sexual Assault as a Crime

All the participants who had spoken directly with accusers said they struggled to remain objective because they sympathized with the students they were interviewing.

They said they were personally disturbed by the issue of assault, and some said it was difficult to not immediately believe the accusers. That is an issue professional journalists have also encountered, most notably Sabrina Rubin Erdely, the Rolling Stone journalist whose story profiling an accuser was later retracted, and who was criticized for being too quick to believe her source without fact-checking the source’s story (Coronel, Coll &

Kravitz, 2015). The participants in this study said they remained sensitive during interviews with accusers by giving them more control over the course of the interview and allowing them to take breaks and go at their own pace. That is advice that the Dart

Center for Journalism and Trauma gives to journalists covering assault, and some participants said they had looked at the Dart Center’s advice for dealing with sources who had experienced trauma (Dart Center for Journalism and Trauma).

69 Two participants in this study discussed how they had previously written about reported assaults, and as they worked on their more recent investigative projects, the student journalists realized that it would be traumatic for victims to read about their own assaults in the campus newspaper. Both participants said they felt some guilt when thinking about accusers’ reactions to their coverage. There is research that validates those concerns: a 1996 study focusing on accusers in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, found that some were re-traumatized and upset when reading about their assaults in the newspaper, although for those accusers, being identified in the newspaper was their major concern (Haws and Ramsey, 1996).

None of the participants in the current study had identified accusers without their consent. That is consistent with long- practice among student journalists: a 1997 study found that 70 percent of journalism students at the time believed accusers should only be named if they ask for or consent to it, are well-known or have been murdered

(Karloff, 1997). There have been some exceptions over the years, such as the 1992 case in which the student newspaper at Marshall University named an accuser in an assault case because they wanted to treat assault like other crimes, a decision that proved to be controversial in their community (Wolper, 1993). However, participants in this current study said they believed assault was an especially traumatizing crime and should be handled with particular care and discretion, agreeing more with Jared Flesher, a former student journalist at the University of Richmond who wrote about his decision to not identify an accuser in a stalking case (Flesher, 2006). Flesher said he did not want to traumatize the accuser because of the stigma around stalking, but he felt some unease

70 about his decision to not name the accuser and wondered if he had been fair (Flesher,

2006). None of the participants in this current study, however, expressed regret about not identifying an accuser.

Although participants said they sympathized with accusers, all the participants who had dealt with accused students said they made attempts to be objective. They shared the concerns of some of the journalism students surveyed in a 1997 study, who said that being publicly accused of assault was damaging to someone’s reputation, even if they were later found not guilty (Karloff, 1997). The results of the present study differ from the 1997 study because of the dramatic increase of online communication over the past two decades — the internet now makes it easier to find news articles from many years ago, and participants were aware of the relative permanence of their news coverage.

One specifically cited Google searches as a concern about the long-term consequences to people accused of sexual assault. That concern mostly applied to allegations that were handled by university administration only — most of the participants said they had no ethical concerns about naming the accused if the case was already public record because a suspect had been arrested or gone to trial. That is consistent with long-standing practice that daily newspapers have typically identified people accused of crimes when the cases had led to and court hearings (Thayer and Pasternack, 1994).

Sexual assault can be covered incidentally (coverage of a single case) or collectively (by focusing on bigger-picture angles about how past cases had been handled). Participants in this study said that highlighting the pervasiveness and mishandling of sexual assault on a collective level, rather than focusing on individual

71 cases, helped them remain objective. They said they saw assault as a large-scale problem that was more far-reaching than one person’s story, although profiling students helped put a face on the issue. Their belief that sexual assault should be addressed at a collective rather than individual level aligns with the conclusions of several studies that emphasize the importance of assault as a public health issue (Godderis and Root, 2017; DeGrue et al., 2012; Somanader, 2014).

Conflicts of Interest and Personal Connections to Assault

Participants in this study reported experiencing both direct and indirect conflicts of interest, and they were also concerned about perceived conflicts of interest affecting the credibility of their stories and their newspapers. One participant said he experienced a direct conflict because he was friends with the student he was covering; others noted more indirect conflicts, saying they were friends of friends of their sources. They were aware that those conflicts of interest were an ethical concern, and many participants said that they had deliberately avoided covering people they knew, which is a common ethical practice to avoid conflicts of interest (Knowlton and Reader, 2009, p. 51).

Participants also said that due to a past assault either they or a friend had experienced, they were emotionally connected to the issue of assault and found those strong feelings to be a conflict in their reporting, rather than simply a matter of bias. Two participants said they repressed their emotions when covering their stories but then struggled with emotional trauma afterwards. Covering traumatic stories can be emotionally difficult for journalists, according to a 2007 study that included interviews with student journalists who had covered a death penalty murder trial (Dworznik and

72 Grubb, 2007). The Dart Center for Journalism and Trauma acknowledges the emotional effects of difficult stories on the journalists who cover them and offers advice for journalists dealing with trauma resulting from their coverage (Dart Center, 2015). As stated in the Method section, participants in this current study were debriefed after their interviews and were provided with the Dart Center’s information.

Aside from the few participants whose personal experiences created some conflict of interest, most were relatively detached from the cases they covered but still had to contend with emotional bias. They tried to confront their biases by focusing on the observable principles of “fairness” and “balance” in an attempt to keep their coverage neutral. Objectivity requires journalists to acknowledge and think about their own biases, which is not always evident to their audiences—“When one is trying to be objective, one is engaged in an internal struggle to suppress biases; there are no outward indicators of that struggle, and in the end the only person who can tell whether a journalist is being objective is that journalist” (Knowlton and Reader, 2009, p. 47). Fairness and balance, however, are “outwardly observable aspects of objectivity” that journalists can use when they feel a strong connection to what they are covering (p. 47). Although participants could not completely control their strong feelings about assault, they could make attempts to be fair and balanced, which they hoped would show in their work and help make their reporting appear to be more objective.

Some have argued that students accused of assault are deprived of due process and assumed to be guilty because of the disturbing nature of the crime and the heated debate surrounding the larger issues (Yoffe, 2014; Nemmer, 2016). The discussion about

73 “due process” has taken on ideological and partisan tones in recent years, with conservatives and Republicans often accusing liberals and Democrats of circumventing due process for the accused and/or exaggerating the problem of campus sexual assault:

“For years now, Democrats have described our nation’s campuses as places of overwhelming danger, where female students are at the mercy of predatory male classmates and callous administrators,” Emily Yoffe wrote in a December 2017 article (Yoffe, 2017). Jeannie Suk Gersen, a Harvard law professor and contributor to The

New Yorker, wrote that if someone questioned a student reporting assault, they may be seen as supporting the crime of sexual assault itself—“Examining evidence and concluding that a particular accuser is not indeed a survivor, or a particular accused is not an assailant, is a sin that reveals that one is a rape denier, or biased in favor of perpetrators” (Gersen, 2015). There also are ideological allegations that academics are quick to presume guilt and to take punitive actions before investigations are concluded— for example, after a professor at the University of California at Santa Cruz was accused of sexual misconduct, more than 130 researchers signed an open online statement condemning him and vowing to exclude him and anyone who supported him from “any events or gatherings where we are present” (Mangan, 2018). U.S. Education Secretary

Betsy DeVos, who had frequently expressed concerns about due process for accused students, has been met by protestors from several universities who disagree with her policy changes in that regard (Balingit and Larimer, 2017; Potter, 2017; Teale, 2017).

One participant in this study noted a similar problem, saying his staff had spoken with students who were afraid to express support for how their university had handled a

74 misconduct case, and his newspaper had been criticized for covering students who supported the administration.

The issue of due process for accusers was a focus of the women’s movement beginning in the 1970s. In the mid-1970s, several states changed their evidentiary laws used in rape cases following efforts from feminist organizations and law enforcement agencies to encourage more people to report their rapes. Rape shield laws, as they have become known, reversed common law doctrine that allowed defendants to ask about a complainant’s previous sexual contact in an attempt to discredit them. Opponents of such intrusions into an accuser’s past argued that the practice discouraged people from reporting their assaults (Galvin, 1986, p. 765-767). Almost all states also eliminated the requirement that an accuser resist their assailant to the best of their physical ability to demonstrate nonconsent (p. 769).

Within that divisive milieu, participants in this study sought outside perspectives, such as lawyers, advocates, and research on assault in order to address direct conflicts.

Speaking to as many people as possible, especially people directly involved in the story, fits with a common definition of journalistic balance (Knowlton and Reader, 2009, p. 47).

Participants said they felt that striving for balance would help minimize the effects of their personal biases.

Participants said they had relied on documents to not only confirm what their sources told them but to also serve as relatively unbiased accounts of events. Police reports, for example, usually provide a “just the facts” account of a case and law enforcement’s involvement. Participants also referred to their university’s Clery reports

75 as a starting point for their investigations. Looking through public records and documents to find information useful to the public can be a time-consuming and difficult task, but it is one way to advance the public’s right to know without infringing on personal privacy

(Knowlton and Reader, 2009, p. 54).

Another method participants used to address their conflicts of interest was seeking help and advice from others, including advisers and coworkers. Although a 2012 study found that student journalists often believed their advisers did not want them covering controversial topics (Filak, 2012), participants in this current study said their advisers were encouraging of the assault coverage and had served as valuable resources for advice about ethical conduct. Many participants said their advisers also had discussed the emotional effects of reporting with them. Participants also told their coworkers about the difficulty of reporting on such a traumatic issue and found support from fellow student journalists who could relate to the tensions between being a reporter and being a member of a campus community.

Concern about Negative Effect of Stories

Beyond the more immediate concerns about how to approach their reporting about sexual assault, participants also discussed their concerns about possible harms their reporting could cause. That is, they experienced tension between deontology, or ethics based in duty or responsibility, and consequentialism, or ethics based upon concern about the outcome of a decision. Ethical decisions made from a deontological approach are based on a responsibility the actors feel or a duty they feel they have. Deontologists often argue that “the ‘right’ takes priority over the ‘good,’” and evil means should not be

76 justified by a positive outcome (Plaisance, 2014, p. 28). Consequentialist ethics is

(usually) more concerned with decisions will create the most “good,” and acts are judged based on their results and what will provide “the greatest benefit for the greatest number of people” (p. 32).

An example relevant to this study is the discussion at a 1994 seminar about sex in the media, at which journalists discussed how they felt conflicting responsibilities to both inform the public about the risk of assault and to protect (and remain sensitive toward) their sources. One journalist commenting on the discussion said the journalists could not decide how best to treat stories on assault in order to create the most good for everyone involved (Black, 1995).

Many participants in the current study, especially those who had directly talked to accusers, expressed concern over how their stories would affect their sources and their broader communities, including students accused of assault, students reporting assault, and the campus community at large. Participants were especially worried that their reporting had contributed to the traumatizing of a source or had worsened a source’s already fragile emotional state. Most participants seemed to have applied deontological ethics during their reporting because they felt obligations to both inform their communities and to protect their sources, and shifted to teleological ethics as they contemplated publication of their reports — they wanted their stories to have a positive impact and help students who had been assaulted, but also worried about the possible harm publication could have on victims.

77 In the end, though, it appears the teleological approach was more dominant among participants in this study. Many said they kept the overall purpose of the reporting in mind when they felt guilty about asking difficult questions. Throughout the reporting process, they were motivated by their stories’ potential to help people who had been assaulted and to raise awareness about assault on their campuses. People who have been assaulted can feel empowered in coming forward because they want to encourage others to report—for example, it was the desire to help others come forward that encouraged

Nancy Ziegenmeyer to tell the Des Moines Register about her assault in 1990 (Schorer,

1990). Participants in this study said they made efforts to emphasize their universities’ resources for students reporting assault because they wanted their stories to provide helpful information for other students who found themselves in difficult situations.

Participants said that reminding both themselves and their sources that the stories could have a positive impact for other people helped them find a balance between protecting their sources during a vulnerable time and informing their communities about the issue.

78 Conclusion

This study focused on how student journalists implement their ethical obligations, particularly fairness and balance, when covering sexual assault, which is an emotionally charged issue that personally affects many students. The study aimed to discover how student journalists reconcile their roles as students in the campus community with their responsibilities as student journalists. Although sexual assault, particularly campus rape, has been a major news story since the 2011 “Dear Colleague” letter and in light of the

“#MeToo” movement, there is little existing research into how student journalists have covered the topic.

This study was inspired by my own personal experience as a student journalist. At my former student newspaper at a small liberal arts college, I covered a committee of students who wanted to change the sexual misconduct policy and the ensuing debate when the college administration decided to reconsider the policy. At the time, I felt conflicted between my role in the close-knit campus community and what I was learning about assaults at the college. Covering that story, and hearing my coworkers at the time say they faced the same dilemma, made me interested in learning more about other student journalists’ experiences.

There is extensive previous research on the issue of sexual assault and how it affects victims. Victims are often hesitant to report or publicly discuss their assaults out of fear that they will be blamed for the assault, fear of retaliation or harassment from supporters of the accused, or a sense of shame about the incident (Thompson et al.,

2007). Much of the previous research into the ethics of media that cover sexual assault

79 has mostly focused upon whether an accuser should be identified (with most publications choosing not to identify the accuser); few studies have considered other ethical dimensions facing journalists who cover such an emotionally volatile issue. Moreover, there have been relatively few recent studies into the ethics of student journalism in general, and there is very little research into the ethical aspects of student journalists who cover sexual assault. This study provides an updated look at how student journalists make ethical decisions in the early 21st century, and includes discussion about more modern issues, such as the spread of information online via the web and via social media. This study also helps meet the need for research into how student journalists cover sexual assault specifically, which has become more of a concern in recent years as assault has become more widely discussed and addressed both on campus and in broader society.

This study includes qualitative interviews with current and former student journalists. Using interviews for this study limits the number of cases that could be studied. A content analysis, for example, may have allowed for more than 20 universities and student newspapers to be included. The sample size of 20 is also relatively small, and expanding this study to include more student journalists, particularly more male participants, might provide more diverse perspectives into how student journalists of different genders handle assault stories. Another limitation of this study is that only two of the participants had already graduated, and they were both recent graduates. Including participants who had graduated some years ago, and who have since then gained professional experience, could provide more insight into how professional journalists reflect upon their experiences as former student journalists.

80 Future research along these lines might apply the same approach to studying how experienced journalists cover sexual assault. A study of professional journalists could be compared to the results of this study to learn more about how journalists’ views of professional ethics changes after they leave college and enter the profession. Another future study could evaluate student journalists’ coverage of other divisive issues facing higher education, which would provide insight into how ethical approaches to sexual assault coverage might differ from ethical approaches to the coverage of other issues such as free speech and protest on campus, allegations of gender or race discrimination, and tensions between faculty and administration.

I also have learned some important lessons through the process of developing and completing this thesis. I have learned more about how student journalists focus on the principles of fairness and balance to deal with, and perhaps even compensate for, their personal biases. I want to be a reporter at a community newspaper, and it is likely that in that work, I may encounter the same tensions between personal bias and objectivity, perhaps even the same personal/professional conflicts of interest, that many of this study’s participants faced when working in their relatively small communities. I also learned from this study how to remain sensitive toward sources who have directly or indirectly experienced trauma, which should be useful in my future reporting of traumatic events. Most of all, my work on this thesis has taught me about the value of student journalism in preparing journalists for their careers—the student journalists I spoke with had dedicated their time and efforts to in-depth reporting and had learned about ethical

81 practices not just in the classroom, but also in their communities, which prepared them to enter the field with some real-life experiences, not just textbook idealism.

Sexual assault is a contentious issue, especially on college campuses where communities are often relatively small. For student journalists, it is an especially difficult topic to cover. Student journalists, including those who participated in this study, may have personal connections to the issue of campus assault through themselves or their friends, and those personal connections may make them feel sympathy for accusers or doubt about the accused’s innocence. Student journalists should be sensitive toward accusers while also presuming the innocence of the accused and allowing the accused multiple opportunities to offer their perspectives. Journalists can remain sensitive toward accusers by discussing with them which details they are comfortable with being published, as well as refraining from publishing their names without their consent.

Journalists can also be sensitive during the interview by offering their sources the option to take a break or tell their story over the course of more than one meeting. When interacting with the accused, student journalists should treat those people with respect as well, reaching out to them several times for a comment and not presuming that they are guilty. Although student journalists may have personal biases in stories about campus assault, they can still strive for objective coverage by fulfilling their obligations to be fair and balanced. Focusing on assault as a systemic problem or covering the university’s handling of assault cases as a whole can contextualize the issue without exploiting a particular source.

82 Covering sexual assault can be traumatizing for journalists, and journalists should seek help from mental health professionals if needed. They can also talk to editors, advisers and coworkers for support both emotionally and for help in making difficult ethical decisions. Journalists should be aware of how their work is affecting them emotionally and prioritize their mental health when covering traumatic topics such as assault.

83 References

Anonymous. (2015, October 27). Survivor asks to have name published. The Stallion.

Retrieved October 13, 2016, from http://www.abacstallion.com/single-

post/2015/10/27/Survivor-asks-to-have-name-published

Arras, J. (2014, November 21). Abolish the Greek system. The Cavalier Daily.

Associated Press. (2017, February 07). News values and principles. Retrieved July 16,

2017, from https://www.ap.org/about/our-story/news-values

Association of American Universities. Report on the AAU Campus Climate Survey on

Sexual Assault. (2015, September 21). Retrieved October 15, 2016, from

https://www.aau.edu/key-issues/aau-climate-survey-sexual-assault-and-sexual-

misconduct-2015

Balingit, M., & Larimer, S. (2017, September 28). DeVos assailed by protesters at

college campuses in Boston, Washington. The Washington Post. Retrieved from

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2017/09/28/protesters-

criticize-devos-and-change-on-campus-sexual-assault-probes/

Barchenger, S. (2016, July 15). Read the victim's full statement in Vanderbilt rape

case. The Tennesseean.

Barnett, B. (2012). How Newspapers Frame Rape Allegations: The Duke University

Case. Women & Language, 35(2), 11–33.

Barnett, B. (2008). Sports Talk: How the News Media Framed the Duke University

Lacrosse Case. International Communication Association Conference Papers.

84 Bartholet, E. et. al. Rethink Harvard's Sexual Harassment Policy. (2014, October 15). The

Boston Globe. Retrieved December 8, 2016, from

http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2014/10/14/rethink-harvard-sexual-

harassment-policy/HFDDiZN7nU2UwuUuWMnqbM/story.html

Barzilai-Nahon, K. (2008). Toward a theory of network gatekeeping: A framework for

exploring information control. Journal of the American Society for Information

Science and Technology,59(9), 1493-1512. doi:10.1002/asi.20857

Becker, A. (2015, November 23). 91 Percent of Colleges Reported Zero Incidents of

Rape in 2014. Retrieved October 15, 2016, from

http://www.aauw.org/article/clery-act-data-analysis/

Besley, J., & Roberts, M. C. (2010). Qualitative Interviews with Journalists About

Deliberative Public Engagement. Journalism Practice,4(1), 66-81.

Bickham, S., & Shin, J.H. (2009). Organizational Influences on College Student

Newspapers: A Web Survey of Newspapers of ACEJMC Programs. Conference

Papers -- International Communication Association, 1–41.

Black, J. (1995). Rethinking the Naming of Sex Crime Victims. Newspaper Research

Journal,16(3), 96-112. doi:10.1177/073953299501600309

Bloch, E. (2016a, March 2). Wayne Barton tells reporter “look little girl, stay in your

lane” in response to open gang rape case at his center. University Press. Retrieved

May 26, 2017, from http://www.upressonline.com/2016/03/wayne-barton-tells-

reporter-little-girl-stay-in-your-lane-responding-to-gang-rape/

85 Bloch, E. (2016b, March 29). Party where student was allegedly gang raped last year to

happen again. University Press. Retrieved May 26, 2017, from

http://www.upressonline.com/2016/03/party-where-student-was-allegedly-gang-

raped-last-year-to-happen-again/

Brown, S. (2016, October 26). Brigham Young Will Grant Disciplinary Amnesty to

Sexual-Assault Victims. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved December

8, 2016, from http://www.chronicle.com/blogs/ticker/byu-will-grant-disciplinary-

amnesty-to-sex-assault-victims/115249

Bruns, A. (2005). Gatewatching: Collaborative Online News Production. New York,

NY: Peter Lang Publishing.

Campus Sexual Assault Under Investigation. The Chronicle of Higher Education.

Retrieved September 29, 2017, from http://projects.chronicle.com/titleix/

Case, T. (1995). Controversy follows Michael Gartner. Editor & Publisher, 128, 12.

Cavalier Daily Managing Board. (2014, November 20). Struggle today, strength

tomorrow. The Cavalier Daily. Retrieved from

http://www.cavalierdaily.com/article/2014/11/struggle-today-strength-tomorrow

Chow, K. (2015). The clash of ethics and law. News Media & the Law, 39(2), 1–1.

Clark, E. (2014, December 7). A letter from a friend: Jackie's story is not a hoax. The

Cavalier Daily.

Clery Center. Retrieved June 11, 2017, from https://clerycenter.org/policy-resources/the-

clery-act/

86 CNN.com - Duke suspends accused lacrosse players, source says (2006, April 19).

Retrieved July 29, 2017, from

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/04/19/duke.arrests/index.html?_s=PM:LAW

Coronel, S., Coll, S., & Kravitz, D. (2015, April 5). Rolling Stone's investigation: 'A

failure that was avoidable.' Columbia Journalism Review. Retrieved December

09, 2016, from http://www.cjr.org/investigation/rolling_stone_investigation.php

Courchesne, C., & Rhod, E. (2016). Maine: Creating a New Model for Covering Sexual

Assault in the Media. Sexual Assault Report, 19(3), 37–46.

Cox Broadcasting Corp. v. Cohn 420 U.S. 469 (1975). Retrieved May 4, 2017, from

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/420/469/case.html

Dadisman, S. (2007). Naming Names. Media Coverage of Sexual Assaults, 29(4), 22.

Dart Center for Journalism and Trauma. Covering Campus Rape and Sexual Assault.

Retrieved December 9, 2016, from

http://dartcenter.org/sites/default/files/Covering Campus Rape.pdf

Dart Center for Journalism and Trauma. Managing Stress & Trauma on Investigative

Projects. (2015, August 5). Retrieved October 11, 2017, from

https://dartcenter.org/content/staying-sane-managing-stress-and-trauma-on-

investigative-projects

DeGue, S., Simon, T. R., Basile, K. C., Yee, S. L., Lang, K., & Spivak, H. (2012).

Moving Forward by Looking Back: Reflecting on a Decade of CDC’s Work in

Sexual Violence Prevention, 2000-2010, Journal of Women’s Health, 21(12),

1211–1218. https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2012.3973

87 DeSantis, N. (2015, May 19). Columbia Student Carries Symbolic Mattress at Graduation

Ceremony. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved December 8, 2016,

from http://www.chronicle.com/blogs/ticker/columbia-student-carries-her-

symbolic-mattress-at-graduation-ceremony/99221

Dewan, S. (2006, May 16). 3rd Duke Lacrosse Player Is Indicted in Rape Case. The New

York Times. Retrieved from

https://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/16/sports/sportsspecial1/16duke.html

DeWulf, K. (2016, April 4). Student publications on three college campuses fall victim to

newspaper theft. Retrieved December 09, 2016, from

http://www.splc.org/article/2016/04/three-newspaper-thefts-march

Duke University Police Department. (2008). Security at Duke University and Duke

University Medical Center. Retrieved from

http://police.duke.edu/news_stats/summaries/Clery/AnnualCleryReport2008.pdf

Dworznik, G., & Grubb, M. (2007). Preparing for the Worst: Making a Case for Trauma

Training in the Journalism Classroom. Journalism & Mass Communication

Educator, 62(2), 190–210.

Eaglin, A. (2007, April 25). Critics decry local paper's coverage. The Chronicle.

Retrieved from http://www.dukechronicle.com/article/2007/04/critics-decry-local-

papers-coverage

Elliott, A. (2014a, November 20). Students claiming responsibility for Phi Kappa Psi

vandalism submit anonymous letter. The Cavalier Daily.

88 Elliott, A. (2014b, December 20). In retrospect: Jackie's friends re-examine Rolling Stone

narrative. The Cavalier Daily.

Elliott, A. (2015, January 12). Phi Kappa Psi reinstated after investigation finds no

'substantive basis' for Rolling Stone allegations. The Cavalier Daily.

End Rape on Campus. Title IX. Retrieved July 31, 2017, from

http://endrapeoncampus.org/title-ix/

Evans, S. (2015, October 27). Why we didn't run the name. The Stallion. Retrieved

October 13, 2016, from http://www.abacstallion.com/single-

post/2015/10/27/Why-we-didnt-run-the-name

Filak, V. F. (2012). A Concurrent Examination of Self-versus-Others Perceptual Bias and

the Willingness to Self-Censor: A Study of College Newspaper Editors and

Advisers. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 89(2), 299-314.

doi:10.1177/1077699012440080

Flesher, J. (2006). Between right and wrong: a student journalist names (some) names.

Columbia Journalism Review, (6), 10.

Florida Star v. B. J. F. (1989). Retrieved May 4, 2017, from

http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/comm/free_speech/floridastar.html

Forsyth, D. R. (1980). A taxonomy of ethical ideologies. Journal of Personality and

Social Psychology,39(1), 175-184. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.39.1.175

Fried, C. B., & Maxwell, A. (2006). Rape Rumors: The Effects of Reporting or Denying

Rumors of Sexual Assaults on Campus. Journal of Applied Social Psychology,

36(11), 2766–2784. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0021-9029.2006.00127.x

89 Galvin, H. R. (1986). Shielding rape victims in the state and federal courts: proposal for

the second decade. Minnesota Law Review 70(4), 763-916.

Gardner, M. (2014, November 30). Deans respond to Rolling Stone article. The Cavalier

Daily.

Gartner, M. (1991, July). Naming the Victim. Columbia Journalism Review, 30(2), 54-

55.

Gersen, J. S. (2015, December 11). Shutting Down Conversations About Rape at Harvard

Law. The New Yorker. Retrieved from https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-

desk/argument-sexual-assault-race-harvard-law-school

Godderis, R., & Root, J. L. (2017). Addressing Sexual Violence on Post-Secondary

Campuses is a Collective Responsibility. Transformative Dialogues: Teaching &

Learning Journal, 9(3), 1–9.

Gollmitzer, M. (2014). Precariously Employed Watchdogs? Journalism Practice,8(6),

826-841. doi:10.1080/17512786.2014.882061

Gordon, K. (2006, April 11). Stripping the allegations. The Technician.

Hanson, G. (2002). Learning Journalism Ethics: The Classroom Versus the Real World.

Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 17(3), 235–247.

Haws, D., & Ramsey, M. (1996). The Winston-Salem Journal and the identification of

sexual assault victims. Newspaper Research Journal, 17(3/4), 98–104.

Hendrix, B. S. (2012). A Feather on One Side, a Brick on the Other: Tilting the Scale

Against Males Accused of Sexual Assault in Campus Disciplinary Proceedings.

Georgia Law Review, 47(2), 591–621.

90 Hayes, R. M., Abbott, R. L., & Cook, S. (2016). It’s Her Fault. Violence Against

Women,22(13), 1540-1555. doi:10.1177/1077801216630147

Heskett, C. (2014, November 22). President Sullivan suspends fraternity organizations,

social activities until Jan. 9. The Cavalier Daily.

Hindi, S. (2006, April 17). DNA results negative in Duke case. The Technician.

Hinnant, A., Jenkins, J., & Subramanian, R. (2016). Health Journalist Role

Conceptions. Journalism Practice,10(6), 763-781.

Hirtle, K. (2014, December 5). UVa culture does not make men rapists. The Cavalier

Daily.

Holley, J., & Sweezey, C. (2006, March 30). Rape Accusation Against Lacrosse Players

Roils Duke. The Washington Post. Retrieved July 31, 2017, from

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-112098.html?refid=easy_hf

International Association of Chiefs of Police. (2005, July). Investigating Sexual Assaults.

Johnson, M. (1999). How Identifying Rape Victim Affects Readers

Perceptions. Newspaper Research Journal,20(2), 64-80.

doi:10.1177/073953299902000206

Johnson, C., & Hawbaker, K. (2018, March 5). #MeToo: A timeline of events. Chicago

Tribune. Retrieved March 12, 2018, from

http://www.chicagotribune.com/lifestyles/ct-me-too-timeline-20171208-

htmlstory.html

91 Jones, L. (2011, May 18). Perp walk? Blame Giuliani. Retrieved November 30, 2017,

from https://www.reuters.com/article/us-eddie-strausskahn-perpwalk/perp-walk-

blame-giuliani-idUSTRE74H71720110518

Kaler, K. (2014, November 21). Sullivan requests Phi Kappa Psi Investigation. The

Cavalier Daily.

Kaminer, A. (2014, December 21). Accusers and the Accused, Crossing Paths at

Columbia University. The New York Times.

Kantor, J., & Twohey, M. (2017, October 5). Harvey Weinstein Paid Off Sexual

Harassment Accusers for Decades. The New York Times. Retrieved March 12,

2018, from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/05/us/harvey-weinstein-

harassment-allegations.html

Kirk, M. (2016, September 1). UK follows through on promise of suit against Kernel.

Kentucky Kernel. Retrieved October 3, 2016, from

http://www.kykernel.com/news/uk-follows-through-on-promise-of-suit-against-

kernel/article_c5ae37a6-7078-11e6-8a93-8fecd0ff5975.html

Knowlton, S. R., & Reader, B. (2009). Moral reasoning for journalists (2nd ed.).

Wesport: Praeger.

Know Your IX. Our Values. Retrieved June 13, 2017, from

https://www.knowyourix.org/our-values/

Know Your IX. Our Wins. Retrieved June 14, 2017, from

https://www.knowyourix.org/our-wins/

92 Lisak, D., Gardinier, L., Nicksa, S. C., & Cote, A. M. (2010). False Allegations of Sexual

Assault: An Analysis of Ten Years of Reported Cases. Violence Against Women,

16(12), 1318–1334. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801210387747

Lonsway, K. A. (2010). Trying to Move the Elephant in the Living Room: Responding to

the Challenge of False Rape Report. Violence Against Women, 16(12), 1356–

1371. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801210387750

Mangan, K. (2015, February 2). Should Colleges Be Forced to Swiftly Report Rapes to

the Police? The Chronicle of Higher Education.

Mangan, K. (2016, November 11). Baylor Faces Rising Calls for Transparency in

Sexual-Assault Scandal. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved December

8, 2016, from http://www.chronicle.com/article/Baylor-Faces-Rising-Calls-

for/238397

Mangan, K. (2017, September 22). What You Need to Know About the New Guidance

on Title IX. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from

http://www.chronicle.com.proxy.library.ohio.edu/article/What-You-Need-to-

Know-About/241277

Mangan, K. (2018, January 4). How Sexual-Assault Accusations Against a Professor

Brought Paranoia to His Campus. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved

from https://www-chronicle-com.proxy.library.ohio.edu/article/How-Sexual-

Assault-Accusations/242156

March, M. T. (2016, November 17). University of Kentucky victims seek to join lawsuit

against student newspaper. Retrieved November 17, 2016, from

93 http://www.splc.org/article/2016/11/university-of-kentucky-victims-seek-to-join-

lawsuit-against-student-newspaper

Margolick, D. (1990, March 25). A Name, a Face and a Rape: Iowa Victim Tells Her

Story. The New York Times. Retrieved from

http://global.factiva.com/redir/default.aspx?P=sa&an=NYTF000020050416dm3p

019sk&cat=a&ep=ASE

Mason, M. (2010). Sample Size and Saturation in PhD Studies Using Qualitative

Interviews. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social

Research, 11(3). Retrieved from http://www.qualitative-

research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1428

Mason, M. (2014, November 30). Student sexual assault survivors speak out. The

Cavalier Daily.

McArdle, M. (2015, June 04). What We Don't Know About False Claims of Rape.

Bloomberg. Retrieved from https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2015-06-

04/what-we-don-t-know-about-false-claims-of-rape

McCrummen, S., Reinhard, B., & Crites, A. (2017, November 9). Woman says Roy

Moore initiated sexual encounter when she was 14, he was 32. The Washington

Post. Retrieved March 12, 2018, from

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/woman-says-roy-moore-

initiated-sexual-encounter-when-she-was-14-he-was-32/2017/11/09/1f495878-

c293-11e7-afe9-4f60b5a6c4a0_story.html?utm_term=.3da8905b4c85

94 McNamara, T. P. (2005). Semantic Priming: Perspectives from Memory and Word

Recognition. Psychology Press.

Nemmer, T. (2016). Campus Insecurity: Due Process, Proof, and Procedure in Campus

Sexual Assault Investigations. Criminal Law Practitioner, 3. Retrieved December

8, 2016.

New, J. (2016, November 10). Campus Sexual Assault in a Trump Era. Inside Higher Ed.

Retrieved June 24, 2017, from

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/11/10/trump-and-gop-likely-try-

scale-back-title-ix-enforcement-sexual-assault

Niblock, S., & Bindel, J. (2017). Reframing Reporting of Childhood Sexual

Exploitation. Journalism Practice,11(5), 577-591.

North Carolina State University Police. (n.d.). Crimes Reported on NCSU Campus. [E-

mail interview.]

NPR. Guidance On A Sensitive Subject: Victims/Survivors Of Sexual Assault. NPR

Ethics Handbook. Retrieved July 29, 2017, from http://ethics.npr.org/memos-

from-memmott/guidance-on-a-sensitive-subject-victimssurvivors-of-sexual-

assault/

Novkov, J. (2016). Equality, Process, and Campus Sexual Assault, Maryland Law

Review, 75(2), 590.

Online News Association. (n.d.). Withholding names and information. Retrieved July 30,

2017, from https://ethics.journalists.org/topics/withholding-names-and-

information/

95 Orchowski, L. M., Meyer, D. H., & Gidycz, C. A. (2009). College Women’s Likelihood

to Report Unwanted Sexual Experiences to Campus Agencies: Trends and

Correlates, Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 18(8), 839–858.

https://doi.org/10.1080/10926770903291779

Ortiz, E., & Siemaszko, C. (2017, November 30). NBC News fires Matt Lauer after

sexual misconduct review. Retrieved March 12, 2018, from

https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/sexual-misconduct/nbc-news-fires-today-

anchor-matt-lauer-after-sexual-misconduct-n824831

Overholser, G. (1989, July 11). Why hide rapes? The New York Times. Retrieved from

http://www.nytimes.com/1989/07/11/opinion/why-hide-rapes.html

Payne, M. (2015, February 19). Erica Kinsman, who accused Jameis Winston of rape,

tells her story in new documentary ‘The Hunting Ground’. The Washington Post.

Phi Kappa Psi. (2014, November 20). LETTER: Statement from Phi Kappa Psi. The

Cavalier Daily.

Pirolli, B. (2017). Travel Journalists and Professional Identity. Journalism

Practice,11(6), 740-759.

Plaisance, P. L. (2014). Media ethics: Key principles for responsible practice (2nd ed.).

Los Angeles: SAGE.

Poell, T., & Rajagopalan, S. (2015). Connecting Activists and Journalists: Twitter

communication in the aftermath of the 2012 Delhi rape. Journalism Studies,16(5),

719-733.

96 Potter, L. (2017, September 28). Students protest campus appearance by Education

Secretary DeVos. The GW Hatchet. Retrieved March 19, 2018, from

https://www.gwhatchet.com/2017/09/28/students-protest-education-secretary-

devos-during-campus-discussion/

Poynter. Reporting on Sexual Violence. Retrieved July 29, 2017, from

http://www.newsu.org/courses/covering-sexual-violence

Reader, B. (2006). Distinctions that Matter: Ethical Differences at Large and Small

Newspapers. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 83(4), 851-864.

doi:10.1177/107769900608300408

Reinardy, S., & Moore, J. (2007). When Do Journalists Learn about Ethics? An

Examination of Introductory and Graduating Students Ethical

Perceptions. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator,62(2), 161-175.

doi:10.1177/107769580706200204

Reinardy, S., & Moore, J. (2007). When Do Journalists Learn about Ethics? An

Examination of Introductory and Graduating Students' Ethical

Perceptions. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator,62(2), 161-175.

doi:10.1177/107769580706200204

Reuters. The Essentials of Reuters Sourcing. Retrieved July 16, 2017, from

http://handbook.reuters.com/index.php?title=The_Essentials_of_Reuters_sourcing

#Fairness

Richardson, B. (2004). The Public’s Right to Know: A Dangerous Notion. Journal of

Mass Media Ethics, 19(1), 46–55.

97 Riski, R. J., & Grusin, E. K. (2003). Newspaper's Naming Policy Continues Amid

Controversy. Newspaper Research Journal,24(4), 64-76.

doi:10.1177/073953290302400406

Rocheleau, M. (2014, July 2). Harvard overhauls handling of sexual assault reports.

Boston Globe. Retrieved December 8, 2016, from

http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2014/07/02/harvard-overhaul-way-handles-

sexual-assault-reports/f9vQgdGeHTeg3vByODQ7jO/story.html

Rudnick, A. (2017, July 17). [E-mail interview].

Ruiz, J., & Treadwell, D. F. (2002). The Perp Walk: Due Process v. Freedom of the

Press. Criminal Justice Ethics, 21(2), 44–56.

https://doi.org/10.1080/0731129X.2002.9992129

Salganik, M.J. and D.D. Heckathorn (2004). “Sampling and Estimation in Hidden

Populations Using Respondent-Driven Sampling.” Sociological Methodology. 34

(1): 193–239.

Saul, S., & Goldstein, D. (2017, September 7). Betsy DeVos Says She Will Rewrite

Rules on Campus Sex Assault. The New York Times. Retrieved from

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/07/us/devos-campus-rape.html

Sayare, S., De la Baume, M., & Mackey, R. (2011, May 16). French Shocked by I.M.F.

Chief’s ‘Perp Walk’. The New York Times.

Schick, D. (2014). Why you should always question a FERPA EXEMPTION. Quill,

102(5), 36–37.

98 Schmidt, P. (2016, November 17). Fight Over the Recording of Title IX Proceedings

Exposes Gaps in Law and Trust. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved

December 8, 2016, from http://www.chronicle.com/article/Fight-Over-the-

Recording-of/238440

Schorer, J. (1990, February 25). It Couldn't Happen To Me: One Woman's Story. Des

Moines Register. Retrieved from

http://www.soc.iastate.edu/sapp/RapeVictimsStory.pdf

Sex in the Media: The Public's Right to Know vs. The Victim's . National

seminar sponsored by Texas Christian University Department of Journalism, Dec.

2-3, 1994, Fort Worth, Texas.

Shapiro, T. R. (2016, November 7). Jury awards $3 million in damages to U-Va. dean for

Rolling Stone defamation. Washington Post. Retrieved May 4, 2017.

Shelton-Mason County Journal. Why we do what we do. (1978, February 2). Shelton-

Mason County Journal, p. 4.

Shoemaker, P.J. and Vos, T.P. (2009). Gatekeeping Theory. Thousand Oaks., Calif.:

SAGE.

Simon, T. F., Fico, F., & Lacy, S. (1989). Covering Conflict and Controversy: Measuring

Balance, Fairness, Defamation. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly,

66(2), 427-434. doi:10.1177/107769908906600223

Singer, J. B. (2007). Contested Autonomy: Professional and popular claims on

journalistic norms. Journalism Studies,8(1), 79-95.

doi:10.1080/14616700601056866

99 Sinozich, S., & Langton, L. (2014, December). (United States, Department of Justice,

Bureau of Justice Statistics).

Smolkin, R. (August/September 2007). Justice Delayed. American Journalism

Review,19-29.

Society of Professional Journalists. SPJ Code of Ethics. (2014, September 6). Retrieved

December 09, 2016, from http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp

Somanader, T. (2014, September 19). President Obama Launches the "It's On Us"

Campaign to End Sexual Assault on Campus. Retrieved July 31, 2017, from

https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2014/09/19/president-obama-

launches-its-us-campaign-end-sexual-assault-campus

Stevens, H. (2017, October 16). #MeToo campaign proves scope of sexual harassment,

flaw in Mayim Bialik's op-ed. . Retrieved March 12, 2018, from

http://www.chicagotribune.com/lifestyles/stevens/ct-life-stevens-monday-me-too-

mayim-bialik-1016-story.html

Stevenson, J. (2006, May 16). Third suspect indicted; Lacrosse captain proclaims his

innocence. The (Durham) Herald-Sun. Retrieved May 2, 2017, from the

LexisNexis database.

Stolberg, S. (2017, July 13). DeVos Says She Will Revisit Obama-Era Sexual Assault

Policies. The New York Times.

Stolberg, S., Alcindor, Y., & Fandos, N. (2017, December 7). Al Franken to Resign From

Senate Amid Harassment Allegations. The New York Times. Retrieved March 12,

100 2018, from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/07/us/politics/al-franken-senate-

sexual-harassment.html?mtrref=www.google.com

Student Press Law Center. Break FERPA. Retrieved May 5, 2017, from

http://www.splc.org/section/break-ferpa

Student Press Law Center. Guide to student press freedom at public colleges. Retrieved

July 31, 2017, from http://www.splc.org/article/2015/10/student-press-freedom-

at-public-colleges

The Daily Tar Heel. Retrieved July 30, 2017, from

http://www.dailytarheel.com/search?q=0&page=1&ti=0&tg=0&ty=0&ts_month=

0&ts_day=0&ts_year=0&te_month=0&te_day=0&te_year=0&s=%22duke%2Bla

crosse%22&au=0&o=date&a=1

Taylor, K. (2017, July 14). Columbia Settles With Student Cast as a Rapist in Mattress

Art Project. The New York Times.

Teale, C. (2017, September 7). Protests Greet Education Secretary Betsy DeVos on

GMU’s Arlington Campus. ARL Now. Retrieved March 19, 2018, from

https://www.arlnow.com/2017/09/07/protests-greet-education-secretary-betsy-

devos-on-gmus-arlington-campus/

Technician Editorial Board. (2006, April 11). Innocent until proven guilty. The

Technician.

Thayer, F., & Pasternack, S. (1994). Policies on Identification of People in Crime

Stories. Newspaper Research Journal,15(2), 56-64.

doi:10.1177/073953299401500207

101 Thompson, M., Sitterle, D., Clay, G., & Kingree, J. (2007). Reasons for Not Reporting

Victimizations to the Police: Do They Vary for Physical and Sexual

Incidents? Journal of American College Health,55(5), 277-282.

doi:10.3200/jach.55.5.277-282

Tracer, Z. (2010, February 19). Mangum faces charges. The Chronicle.

Tracy, M. (2016, January 25). Florida State Settles Suit Over Jameis Winston Rape

Inquiry. The New York Times.

Triplett, M. R. (2012). Sexual Assault on College Campuses: Seeking the Appropriate

Balance Between Due Process and Victim Protection, Duke Law Journal, 62, 487.

United States, Department of Education, Office of the Assistant Secretary. (2011, 4

April). Dear Colleague Letter. Retrieved December 8, 2016, from

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-201104.html

United States, Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights: Sexual Harassment: It’s

Not Academic Pamphlet. (2008). [Pamphlets; FAQs]. Retrieved June 11, 2017,

from http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/ocrshpam.html#_t1d

United States, Department of Education. Revised Sexual Harassment Guidance. (n.d.).

[Policy Guidance]. Retrieved June 4, 2017, from

https://www2.ed.gov/offices/OCR/archives/shguide/index.html#II

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. (2009). Security Report 2009. Retrieved

from http://dps.unc.edu/files/2016/02/Security-Report-2009.pdf

Virginia's Legislative Information System. SB 712. Retrieved June 13, 2017, from

http://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?151%2Bsum%2BSB712

102 Walker, D. L., Geertsema, M., & Barnett, B. (2009). Inverting the Inverted Pyramid: A

Conversation about the Use of Feminist Theories to Teach Journalism. Feminist

Teacher: A Journal of the Practices, Theories, and Scholarship of Feminist

Teaching, 19(3), 177–194.

West, W. (2007, April 12). 'These three ... are innocent'; AG dismisses all charges,

rebukes Nifong. Durham Herald-Sun. Retrieved May 2, 2017.

Wilson, E. E., & Denis, L. (2018, March 29). Kant and Hume on Morality. Retrieved

April 25, 2018, from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-hume-morality/

Wolper, A. (1993). Publishing an alleged rape victim’s name. Editor & Publisher; New

York, 126(29), 16.

Yoffe, E. (2014, December 07). The Putative Epidemic of Campus Rape Is Pushing

Colleges to Adopt Policies Unfair to Men. Slate. Retrieved December 08, 2016,

from

http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2014/12/college_rape_campus_s

exual_assault_is_a_serious_problem_but_the_efforts.html

Yoffe, E. (2017, December 10). Why the #MeToo Movement Should Be Ready for a

Backlash. Politico Magazine. Retrieved March 19, 2018, from

http://politi.co/2jkjenO

Zacharek, S., Dockterman, E., & Sweetland Edwards, H. (2017, December). TIME

Person of the Year 2017: The Silence Breakers. Retrieved March 12, 2018, from

http://time.com/time-person-of-the-year-2017-silence-breakers/

103 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

Thesis and Dissertation Services ! !