The Ukrainian media actively cover the court verdict in Zakarpattia where those accused of raping a fourteen-year-old girl were released on probation. This sentence caused a public outcry, with the topic picked up by media and social media users.
The Commission on Journalistic Ethics notes that a number of media outlets committed violations of journalistic ethics when covering the topic, and condemns speculation on such sensitive topics for the sake of boosting ratings and clickbait.
1. Demonstrating videos with interviews of the survivor’s father (1+1) and grandmother (First Cable Channel).
The Ethics Code of the Ukrainian Journalist warns media professionals to exercise caution while covering issues related to minors (clause 18). Journalists and editors must have reasonable grounds for covering the private life of a minor (minors) and permission to do so from their parents or guardians. It is unacceptable to reveal the names of minors (or to publish information which makes them identifiable) who were involved in, or targeted by, illegal activities or in events related to violence.
By showing the girl’s close relatives, the media published information that makes the survivor, who lives in a small village, easily identifiable.
Journalists of some media also shared information about those charged with the crime, who are also minors (twin brothers whose mother works in the village council). These characteristics are enough to identify the teenagers, considering that the name of the village was provided as well.
2. The plan to invite the relatives of the survivor and possibly the survivor herself to a talk show (1+1 channel).
On March 20, 2023, the verdict in the case of rape of a 14-year-old girl in Zakarpattia was delivered (the crime itself was committed back in 2021). After the verdict was announced, the 1+1 TV channel decided to dedicate a talk show to this topic, inviting relatives of the survivor to participate. Due to the outcry, the show was canceled. However, the Commission takes upon itself to point out the following.
Reproducing events that happened a year and a half ago could lead to re-traumatizing the survivor, who would like to avoid drawing public attention to herself. Even though representatives of 1+1 stated that they obtained the consent of all adult participants of the process, and there was no plan for the underage girl herself to participate, the survivor’s father and grandmother may have not realized the long-term negative consequences of participating in this show, which would have made them famous nationwide. However, journalists should consider such consequences.
Clause 3 of the Ethics Code of the Ukrainian Journalist states: “A journalist must treat a person’s private life with respect. This does not interfere with their right to journalistic investigation connected with certain events and facts if the social significance of information collected and shared by the journalist exceeds the person’s private interests.”
In this case, journalists must take into consideration both the social significance of the topic — rape of a minor — and the right to privacy of all those involved in the process, including both the survivor and the accused. The discussion of this high-profile case should take place in order to contribute to preventing similar crimes in the future, rather than entertaining the audience.
3. Focus on the survivor or the attackers as individuals rather than the crime committed. In some publications and video stories, journalists asked the interlocutors about the girl’s reputation among fellow villagers (“we never noticed anything bad,” “she is a hard-working girl”). In this situation, the opinion of villagers about the survivor’s behavior has nothing to do with the committed crime, and attention to such behavior supports the negative practice of victim blaming.
Assessments of the family where two of the three accused attackers grew up or bringing up the fact that their father serves in the army, according to Channel 24, are equally inappropriate: “This is a good family, not some kind of family where the guys were beaten, and they lived in violence. The twins’ father is a hero.” In this case, journalists demonstrate a stereotypical and biased approach to preparing the material.
4. Clickbait headlines. An example of such a video title can be found on TSN’s YouTube channel: “Still Moral Torture! The Raped Girl Shares How She Lives Next to Her Attackers.”
The Commission on Journalistic Ethics emphasizes that, while covering topics related to crimes involving minors, journalists must take into account their vulnerability in society. Materials on rape of minors must be prepared with the utmost respect to the survivors and with regard to their interests.
The focus should be on how such crimes should be solved and prevented, rather than on the identity of the survivor. Journalists can communicate with the survivor and her relatives, but respect their right to privacy and avoid situations that will lead to further trauma or stigmatization.
The Commission on Journalistic Ethics reminds of its decision “On the Story by TSN (1+1) and Materials of Other Media about the Survivor in the Case about Violence Committed by Police Officers of Kaharlyk Police Department” of 2020, where it urged the media to adhere to the following guidelines while covering crimes against women and minors, particularly related to sexual violence:
- maintain the balance between public interest and the privacy of survivors;
- ensure that the published materials contain no information that would make the survivor of violence identifiable, including information that can become identifiable when put together with other data. Remember that even separate data published by different media can point to a specific person when aggregated;
- respect the dignity of survivors and their families; minimize the chance of harm and re-traumatization of survivors;
- use correct terminology, in particular, avoid the word “victim” and opt for phrasing like “woman/person who survived violence,” “survivor”;
- avoid excessive detailing of the crime, sensationalism of the headlines;
- avoid condoning, encouraging, sympathizing with, or even facilitating criminal behavior. The media must establish zero tolerance for violence.
The Commission on Journalistic Ethics particularly emphasizes the importance of prior training of journalists on the ethical issues of covering sexual violence. Among other things, they should use the Murad Code — a global ethical code to guide the practice of collecting and using information about sexual violence, including war-related sexual violence.
The Code outlines existing minimum standards for the safe, effective and ethical collection and use of information about a victim or survivor of sexual violence. The Code is based on international law and reflects undisputed basic standards that must be applied by all actors, including journalists, to promote an approach focused on the interests of survivors of sexual violence.
We also recommend watching the lecture by Tetiana Troshchynska, editor-in-chief of Hromadske Radio, How to Report on Traumatic Experience in the Media, held by the CJE in April 2022 and available online.
This statement has been prepared as part of the CJE’s work with the financial support of the Media Development Fund Program of the US Embassy in Ukraine. The opinions and judgments expressed herein do not necessarily reflect the position of the US Government.