I'm a peer counselor with CASA (Coalition Against Sexual Assault) at my college. Two Thursdays ago we held Take Back the Night, the entire event was incredibly empowering and wonderful. Before Take Back the Night, we met with the editor of our school newspaper so that we could discuss how the press would cover the event. We told her we were happy to have coverage, but explicitly told her that survivor's could not be quoted unless they were asked permission, and then only anonymously. We said this multiple times, and explained how having someone's rape discussed in the paper would effect the community. So, needless to say, when the paper came out last Tuesday and survivor's experiences were directly quoted (not their empowering speeches, but the quotes regarding physical rape), we were irate.
The survivors who spoke, along with everyone else present at the event, felt that the control they exerted by voicing their assaults was taken away by having it published without permission.The article relied on sensationalism and the exploitation of rape. Also, even though the quotes were anonymous, my college only has 800 undergrads, we are a close community and if one person knows who spoke, everyone else will.
We met with the professors who instructed their journalism class to write about Take Back the Night, and then picked the article that would be published in the paper. At the meeting the editor's of the paper were also present. We voiced our concerns respectively and constructively, and they were callous and patronizing. They asked a tearful survivor, as she was crying, if she had ever read a newspaper, and that they felt sorry for her, but that they wouldn't retract the article or apologize. They said that if we went to court, we wouldn't have a case because it was a public event. When confronted with the fact that we told the editor that quotes could not be used, the editor said she didn't remember that. After being told we were being to emotional and our feelings and concerns were utterly disregarded, the professors left, yet again stating they felt they did nothing wrong.
So, yesterday we staged a protest/rally/forum. We rallied on the steps of our main building with signs and a microphone. We made a petition to boycott the paper until an apology is published and got a lot of signatures. About 50 students spoke about the disempowerment and exploitation that they felt, and the reasons that the article was ethically and factually wrong. We felt good after the rally and felt as though we accomplished something.
Then, last night, the newspaper sent a blast email to our entire campus saying that they do not apologize, they stand by their article, and repeatedly used 'feel' and 'emotional' language, as if we are all just on our periods, and wouldn't be so upset if we were thinking logically.
I don't know what to do next. I'm considering calling alumnae that contribute money, and telling them the situation. I know that the threat of stopped contributions would encourage our administration to take action against the professors (who are only adjuncts). What should CASA do? Does anyone have ideas?
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Take Back the Night Exploitation .
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/10345
Weekly Feministing Newsletter
Feministing RSS Feed
Wow.
That is callous and unethical and I am so sorry you have to deal with that.
I think calling alumni is a good idea. I think talking to the press outside the college is worth considering. Looking into the ethics of this is also worthwhile, and definitely, keep collecting those signatures. Does the campus have a radio station? Because maybe you could find someone sympathetic to interview you about it, where you could bring up - not just the survivors' feelings but actual psychological documents about things like agency and control and rape, and journalistic codes of ethics, and perhaps also sociologial studies on survivors of rape and the psychological and other results of that. You could point out that dismissing the feelings of rape survivors is disrespectful in the extreme. (Even if they were going to stand by their article, they should have apologized for causing the survivors of such a heinous experience any additional pain. I mean, come on! I can concede them the argument that it was a public event, if they don't want to admit that they were in the wrong, but at the very least, a huge apology is necessary). Also drudge up feminist writings on your side - pretty much anything involving the examination of rape and power would do, if you link it to the power play of the journalists in the case over the survivors. You've got to keep them from making you sound like a hysterical woman who bases her argument entirely on feelings, which means you need studies and evidence for your case. Talk to other professors in the journalism department (full professors, the department head, etc.) about the ethics of this and how upset the survivors' are (take them with you, in fact); talk to the dean of the students, the dean of the college, the president of the college... Talk to anyone and everyone in a position of power to make a reasoned and strong argument for your case. There are a bunch of ethics related things involved here, so you're within your rights to go talk to a bunch of professors in random departments to get their opinion (from a professional standpoint) on the ethics of the paper's actions. (This gives you the chance to drum up support around campus).
And for future reference - get everything in writing. Everything. After meetings where you discuss plans of action, send emails (because they're date and time stamped) which go over everything that was decided... And keep a copy.
Call the alumni, definitely. State that the article was exploitation and against the will of the survivors, and what's more, was done despite explicit warnings not to publish the stories.
Get a large number of signatures of people supporting you, not just those involved but all students. Agree to boycott both the paper and every single class the professors teach. When they publish a paper, do they leave them around campus, like, are they free? If they are, every time you see them, grab the papers and toss them in the trash. If you can, dump something wet and sticky on them like a fruit peel or the remains of a smoothie. Or just collect them, store them, and then dump them in a bundle in front of the professor's door, and repeat over and over again. Make it clear that their brand of journalism will not be tolerated.
Was anyone invited, or was it at a venue where you needed tickets or something? If you needed tickets, to get stamped on entrance, or anything else where it wasn't just anyone could come and listen or talk in public, then it was NOT a public event. Would they have been let in if you had not invited them? If not, then they have no grounds to claim it was public. In fact, if they asked you for permission to cover it at ALL you have a case for it not being public, in that if it was public they would not have needed permission.
I'm sorry for the trauma the survivors must be feeling. Do whatever you can to prevent those responsible from continuing to have control over the newspaper. If they must teach, they must, but they need to no longer have any control over the newspaper.
you can also send an email, like the post here, to the whole college, right? maybe create a facebook group (invite facebook alumnae) against the newspaper. also, every time they put out the paper, grab all but two copies and dump them in the trash - it is after all public property, right?
also, highlight in your protests how you were dismissed as "emotional," since that kind of treatment annoys many women.
u say the professors were adjucts. have u spoken to the actually important professors in the communications and english departments? some of them must agree with your cause.
Ah, of course. The "Women's College Advantage." I almost forgot how awful the experience at this particular university can be for students who wish only to make the world a better place. I am so, so sorry; there are no words to describe how sad this makes me.
You could find a journalism student in your organization to write an article about the school paper's actions. She or he could interview someone from your group, a professor on journalistic ethics and someone from the paper. Then, see if the local paper in your town will publish it. If not, e-mail it to everyone you can. Maybe you can shame the paper into an apology by beating them at their own game.
I am also a student at this college and was shocked when I saw the article. I have had problems with the way the paper is being handled anyway, but this is completely ridiculous. I'm horrified at the way this has hurt our community. Good luck as you move forward with this situation.
As a journalism student, I can sort of see why they published what they did. Journalists rarely agree to keep sources anonymous (they will only in dire circumstances) and they need to include enough of the right information to keep the reader interested. However...what they did is unethical. They cannot sit there and make an agreement and then go back on their word. I'm especially interested in your story because I'm working to put TBTN on for next semester and my friends and I haven't yet discussed how to properly handle the media. Anyway, unfortunately I have no advice offhand but please do update us if you make headway. Good luck!
Okay, I'm sorry, but I really don't see how they did anything wrong. They didn't use names, they didn't misquote anyone to change the story, they did what the press does; they reported the event. If the event was public, then what does it matter if the paper reported on it, you said that you have a small college community, and that if one person knows how spoke, everyone would, well then, wouldn't those people know anyway, whether or not the paper reported on it?
I think everyone is overreacting. Its sad and upsetting that people's feelings were hurt and that trust was apparently betrayed, but I see no wrong doing by the press.
They expressly agreed to NOT share the rape stories of the victims in ANY context in the paper in exchange for being permitted to report on it. They then proceeded to not only go against their word, they did so in a way that focused not on the goal of TBTN, to empower victims, but in a way that sensationalized the rapes, which was EXACTLY what the students didn't want.
I mean, if you were there, and you heard the whole speech, you would hear the whole story, and would view the speakers as brave and bold survivors. If you instead read the story in the paper, would you still see them that way, when the paper focused not on how they survived but instead on their attacks? They DID change the context by reprinting the rape stories. They changed the context from "these are rape survivors" to "these are rape victims."
I'm not quite clear on what the agreement was here. Why would anyone need to be "permitted" to report on a public event?
It's not that they needed permission to report on it, it's that they promised not to print rape stories, but did anyway. They could have printed about the event and things that were said without actually reporting the events of people's rapes.
Yes, legally they can do it. But it was a seriously assholish thing to do.
I can see a couple possibilities here and your post is ambiguous as to what exactly happened, so maybe you can clarify.
Was this, or was it not, a public event? Did you need invitations or tickets to enter, or was it open to all comers or all students?
If it was a private event and they did need permission to enter, then they should abide by their agreement.
If it was a public event and they did not need permission to enter, then there is no way for you to stop them from quoting public statements. However, they should not have agreed not to if they weren't going to abide by that, they should have said upfront that they are a paper and they don't need to make agreements like that to cover public events. That way no one would have been surprised.
For the rest of this post I'm assuming it was a public event because that is what your post sounds like.
To me it sounds like what they did wrong was agreeing not to quote people talking in a public setting. If they wrote an article with a slant you didn't like that sucks, but you really can't stop a reporter from accurately quoting speeches made in public to a large audience. What exactly was the purpose of making these speeches in public anyway, if it wasn't for the public to hear them? If you are concerned that the portrayal wasn't complete or accurate you should write letters to the editor or publish your own account.
I get that this sucks, but I don't see how you can have a public speaking event at a small college and then say that you don't want the public to hear what you said.
Why do I only have a choice for liking the comments? When I logged in the links for disliked disappeared. Not that I wanted to dislike anyone's comment but that just seems odd.