How Publicity Might Sway Reporting of Campus Sexual Assaults

At the heart of the recent crusade against campus sexual violence have been students who publicly told their stories of being assaulted and then mistreated by their colleges after reporting the incident. These activists sought to use the publicity to force institutions to change their policies.

But according to at least two universities, the heightened media coverage has led some student victims to wonder whether they have any control over whether their cases become public, if they decide to report to their college or to law enforcement.

Recent statements from officials at Stanford University and the University of Kentucky raise the question of whether publicity about sexual-assault cases can chill reporting on campuses. As more news outlets seek records pertaining to campus investigations — records that journalists often argue should be public — that question becomes an increasingly important one.

Stanford has faced a barrage of negative headlines related to the case of Brock Turner, the former swimmer who was found guilty of sexual assault but given what many people criticized as a light sentence. Last month, in a separate case, a student filed a lawsuit alleging that Stanford was “deliberately indifferent” to sexual-assault complaints filed by her and several other female students against the same male student. Officials there say students are citing fear of publicity as a barrier to coming forward about assaults.

And at the University of Kentucky, Eli Capilouto, the president, has drawn a direct connection between the student newspaper’s detailed articles about a harassment case and a noticeable decline in sexual-assault reports. The university has balked at releasing documents related to that case, which involves a former professor. Mr. Capilouto has argued that doing so would violate a federal law on educational records, as well as the victims’ privacy. This fall the university sued the newspaper, The Kentucky Kernel, to appeal a ruling from the state attorney general that ordered the institution to release the documents. The Kernel obtained the university’s investigation report independently and has published several news stories about it.

Anti-rape activists and scholars who study sexual violence say concern about publicity — more specifically, fear of family and friends finding out — is one factor, among many, that may prevent victims from coming forward. Victims often turn to the campus disciplinary process to avoid the publicity of a criminal trial. Nowadays, given heightened attention on campus sexual assault, details of those cases can emerge publicly, too.

But these activists and scholars, many of whom have spoken out against colleges’ handling of sexual-misconduct reports, say colleges seem to be using the publicity issue as leverage in an attempt to protect their reputations.

“I’m a bit suspicious when universities start to claim that they have to suppress information in order to protect survivors,” said Jennifer Freyd, a psychology professor at the University of Oregon who studies sexual violence. “Maybe in some cases, they’re right. But I’d be cautious.”

The most significant chilling effect, activists and scholars say, comes from the content of the publicity — which often exposes how poorly colleges are handling assault reports.

The debate over balancing victim privacy with transparency raises another issue: whether publishing the nitty-gritty details of allegations or findings — as were included in the Kernel’s reporting about the former professor — is always in the public interest.

Transparency and Privacy

When Mr. Capilouto visited The Chronicle’s offices in December, he stood by his criticism of the student newspaper’s reporting.

“If you have met with victim survivors as I have … [and] if you recognize how privacy is so important to reporting, but also recovering from this — to have a student newspaper provide so much information in an article that anybody in 15 minutes could most likely identify the victims of assault, that is a serious matter,” he said.

Two alleged victims of the professor, who have not been named publicly, decided in November to join the university’s suit against the newspaper because they were concerned about their identities being revealed. “As the media’s interest in the victims’ story has persisted, the line between the laudable goal of transparency and the blatant invasion of privacy has been crossed,” their brief states.

Lauren Schoenthaler, a senior associate provost at Stanford whose duties include overseeing the university’s Title IX office and sexual-violence-prevention programs, said that since the Brock Turner case was thrust into the spotlight, fear of media attention has become one of the most common reasons that students are reluctant to report a sexual assault.

Asked whether Stanford’s statistics show any change in sexual-assault reporting, given the recent uptick in media coverage, Ms. Schoenthaler said it’s difficult to document students’ fears about publicity through numbers. (The number of reports has increased annually over the past three years, according to data Stanford has reported under the Clery Act, though it’s unclear whether more reports mean a higher reporting rate or a higher number of incidents.)

But Ms. Schoenthaler said she is hearing from two sources — the university’s confidential support team for victims and her staff in the Title IX office — that students are worried about publicity.

Students wonder, “is there a chance that if I share this information with the university or with the police, even if I do so anonymously — will my family be reading about the worst night of my life over their morning coffee in the newspaper?” she said.

Mahroh Jahangiri, executive director of Know Your IX, a network of campus survivors and advocates, has heard such concerns from victims she’s worked with before. But she’s skeptical that college officials who argue that public attention is chilling reporting have victims’ best interests at heart.

When it comes to sexual violence, colleges tend to err on the side of less transparency, Ms. Jahangiri said. Colleges should be making basic information about sexual assault public, she said, including nonidentifiable aggregate data about reports received and the timelines of investigations. But most institutions don’t.

Federal and state laws already protect the privacy of individuals, including names and identifying information, said Laura Dunn, executive director of SurvJustice, a nonprofit group that provides legal assistance to campus sexual-assault victims. So as long as colleges are taking the steps required by law and redacting such information from all documents related to a Title IX investigation, they’re in the clear, she said.

“When there is a lack of transparency,” Ms. Dunn said, “exactly one party benefits and that’s the institution.”

Ms. Schoenthaler stressed that Stanford takes responsibility “for all of the ways that we are managing sexual assault on campus.” Last year, the university invested an additional $2.7 million in its sexual-assault prevention programs, she said.

Limits on Information

Public attention on campus sexual violence often leads to the biggest changes in college policy, state policy, and federal policy. And going to the press is the primary mechanism outside of a lawsuit for students to hold institutions accountable, Ms. Dunn said.

But transparency around sexual-assault cases should have limits, many anti-rape activists say. When journalists obtain documents like Title IX complaints and campus investigation reports, they should be cautious about publishing intimate details of assaults, these activists say — advising that reporters should first try to talk to the victims involved.

Alexandra Brodsky, a cofounder of Know Your IX and a fellow at the National Women’s Law Center, questioned whether public colleges should release full investigation reports — even redacted ones — if journalists file records requests. That could chill sexual-assault reporting, she said.

“I can’t imagine what it would be like for every survivor to know that if he or she reported, that was going to make it into the campus paper,” she said.

Frank LoMonte, executive director of the nonprofit Student Press Law Center, said any document kept as a business record of a public college should be accessible to the public, unless there is an overriding reason to withhold all or part of it.

“The concern voiced by victims is not to have lurid or sensational details aired in the media,” he said, “but that’s not an all-or-nothing proposition.” It’s possible, he said, for colleges to protect victim privacy while producing the vast majority of the record.

“There is definitely a public interest in knowing the nature of these offenses, which necessarily requires knowing some of the details,” he said.

Mr. LoMonte pointed out that the former Kentucky professor had been accused of both off-color language and unwanted touching of students, allegations the professor has denied. The former is problematic, but the latter is an actual crime, Mr. LoMonte said. “If all the public knows is that a guy lost his job” following an investigation of alleged “sexual harassment,” he said, “that’s not an adequate level of detail.”

Ms. Brodsky suggested that colleges should release — with some time delay — basic information about each case, such as factors that were considered, the range of sanctions that were considered, and an explanation for the final outcome.

In some cases, even when names and identifying information are redacted, the detail included in a news story might be enough for some readers to identify the victim, perpetrator, and witnesses, Ms. Dunn said.

Sometimes it can’t be avoided, she added: If campus-safety officials at a small college send out a timely warning about an assault, chances are many students and local journalists can deduce additional information, no matter how vague the message is. “Everyone knew what party was happening that night and who left upset,” Ms. Dunn said.

In sexual-assault cases, there are always tradeoffs that must be made between the First Amendment and confidentiality, said Michele Dauber, a law professor at Stanford who helped lead efforts to revise the university’s sexual-assault policy. She has also spearheaded a campaign to recall the judge who handed down Brock Turner’s sentence.

Ms. Dauber said she’s in favor of transparency, “within limits to protect survivor privacy.”

“Students need to understand that these offenses are happening on their campus,” she said. As long as journalists are following their ethical guidelines, she said, “I don’t believe it is appropriate to attack the press.”

Sarah Brown writes about a range of higher-education topics, including sexual assault, race on campus, and Greek life. Follow her on Twitter @Brown_e_Points, or email her at sarah.brown@chronicle.com.