Two weeks ago, I wrote about the New York Times abysmal coverage of a case in New York, in which a New York City police officer was on trial for raping a woman whom he had been summoned to help while his partner "stood guard." That article referred to the complainant in its opening sentence as "a drunken woman."
Today, the Times reports that the two officers were acquitted of all charges except "official misconduct for entering the woman's apartment."
That article opens with: "Two New York City police officers were found not guilty on Thursday of raping a drunken woman who had been helped into her apartment by the officers while on patrol." Emphasis mine.
Even after the men who allegedly raped her have been acquitted of their crimes, the Times can't help but engage in victim-blaming and rape apologia, despite the fact that it's the proliferation of precisely such narratives in the media that is responsible for the biases that result in appallingly low convictions in sex crimes cases.
Email the Public Editor, Arthur Brisbane and/or submit a Letter to the Editor.
Shakesville is run as a safe space. First-time commenters: Please read Shakesville's Commenting Policy and Feminism 101 Section before commenting. We also do lots of in-thread moderation, so we ask that everyone read the entirety of any thread before commenting, to ensure compliance with any in-thread moderation. Thank you.
blog comments powered by Disqus