How to report crimes against women: a gender sensitivity style-book for the Indian media

It's hard to pinpoint the exact point in the history of Indian media when it became okay to report situations of crimes against women with absolutely no thought to the dignity of the subject herself. And worse, it is especially considered fair game if the woman in question is on the wrong side of the law, as witnessed in recent reports of a former child actress involved in an alleged prostitution racket.

As a media person, one can instantly recognise this to be one of "those" stories — the kind that draw in readers in large numbers. A tragedy that can be retold in a number of ways to ascertain "maximum mileage" out of. It is shameful to admit that a large part of our media industry has fallen prey to the lure of the "readership trap"; reporting stories not to inform but to feed the human desire for gory and insensitive details.

One of the first things you learn in a journalism school is to report by a pre-decided style-book, a certain set of rules prepared by every media organisation on the nuances of how a certain story is told. This style-sheet is usually considered to be a holy book for newsroom storytellers, guiding the little details in language and grammar of any copy. But unfortunately, while this newsroom bible can tell you how you should spell honour/honor, it offers no direction on how you should protect it.

And so with as little style-sheet errors as possible, the self-regulated Indian media industry has gone ahead and made some of the biggest blunders in journalism history. Despite our press freedoms, we have failed to draw ethical boundaries on what is appropriate while reporting a story that involves a woman's dignity. I say "woman's dignity" not because I consider the dignity of a man any less, but because it is imperative to recognise the patriarchal order of the present Indian society and how vulnerable a "woman's dignity" remains within it.

This actually brings up a key point that might help understand this perspective a little better. While the Indian media, to a very large extent is free and self-regulated, it is not impervious to the larger cultural influence, and more often than not this seeps into the reporting that you see everyday. Even the most liberal of media organisations at some point dish stories that assert cultural bias. For instance, in this case, the young actress was fair game because she, well, was arrested as part of a sex racket. Her name was made public, details included. Her career graph was evaluated. Some news outlets went all out and put up frames after frames of her pictures, some of which attempted to paint a very different story. And then some of us wondered, "What went wrong?" "How did she end up like this?", without actually giving a second thought to whether we even had the right to ask these questions.

It has become a norm for the media to be judgemental of every situation. We have taken it upon ourselves to be activists without a cause to defend, and let our opinions flow beyond the editorials and op-ed pages. Every one wants to win a Peabody!

I do not exonerate the media houses I have been associated with. Newsrooms are witness to an ongoing struggle over ethical coverage of a potentially "viral" story. But the fact that there is even a conflict on what's defined as ethical and not, says a lot about the mindsets in an Indian newsroom. 

How far we have, as a community of the free press, drifted from unbiased and ethical coverage that respects all aspects of human dignity. This was evident from our shameless unbridled coverage of the recent case involving the former child actress. It is time we stop and review our actions.

As stated earlier, there is no one right way of reporting crimes against women, but there are plenty of ways to do it wrong. So, here's listing a few, in an attempt to create a style-book, if I may, on what is not okay to report when it comes to stories of crimes against women.

1. It's not ok to name or show the face of the victim
This is probably the easiest rule that media organisations can adhere to, and yet over and again we fail so miserably at it. It is perhaps because at a personal level, many among us find it hard to define the word "victim". The sad fact is that even the most unbiased of newsrooms aren't immune to victim blaming. Sometimes it's reported under the guise of being "objective", that information has to be relayed without expressing sympathies. Other times, it's done with little shame, using the victim's name as a "keyword" or a hashtag for the sake of attracting the audience.

2. It is not ok to name the alleged perpetrator, either
On the other end of the spectrum are those eager to mete out justice to perpetrators. And sometimes in our effort to be objective we take liberties of shaming the guilty before the due trial. Names and faces are splashed all over the media, like it is our moral duty to drive justice home. This isn't justice, it's vigilantism! We must refrain from being judgemental.

3. Intimate details are not for public reading pleasure
Also in our attempt to be as comprehensive as our competitor, we often resort to revealing a little too much. As a news person, I have come to understand a reader's appetite for gory details of human tragedy. But what I still don't understand is the media's need to willingly feed this in the most unrestricted manner as possible. When a large publishing house takes the decision to consciously print the unedited version of the victim's FIR, they must realise the inflicting hurt to not just the victim, but also to many others.

As a woman, I know how hard it is to put in words and describe a violation of one's dignity. She has to choose the right phrases, because she knows some form of judgement will always await at the end of her story. I cannot fathom how hurtful it would be for her to see that description printed for everyone to read, discuss and judge. As people in the media, we must restrain from participating in such unedited narratives of rape, molestation, sexual harassment and other crimes that hurt a victim's dignity or colour her character.

4. Images of rape must not shame the victim
While more often than not, we do use sensitive imagery to represent heinous crimes against women, at times we falter. It is sad that it needs to be pointed out that graphic imagery of harm being inflicted on women is inappropriate. It is not ok to show pictures of women being groped, molested and stripped. It is not ok to show pictures of victims of heinous crimes (Read: Badaun). And it is also not ok to show suggestive images of women under trial for sex crimes.

5. Because they are public personalities, doesn't mean their private lives are fair game
This is easier said than done. Media houses dedicate edition after edition of content that peers into the private lives of the famous. Most writers of this genre consider it fair game to "expose" the "dirty secrets" of the famous, citing their "press freedom". This is not ok.

This is of course only an outline of what is possible if we put our hearts and minds to attempt to change the way a story is told. There is always room for debate and suggestions are welcome, but it is up to us to change the way we debate it. 

We are communicators and the efficacy of our jobs lies in how powerful our narratives are. The stories we tell can either be empowering or they can dissect whatever dignity and humanity that remains. It really is up to us how we chose to approach a story.