ID accusers in rape cases
In an image from ABC News, Nafissatou Diallo discusses her case against Dominique Strauss-Kahn Credit: AP
The hotel chambermaid who accused Dominque Strauss-Kahn of rape -- in a case that made headlines around the world -- has come forward to tell her story, and so at last her identity has become public.
Until now, Nafissatou Diallo, the woman who said she was assaulted by the man who headed the International Monetary Fund, wasn't named in the media, even though her identity was known and her credibility publicly doubted.
Why wasn't she named? The answer is that doing so would have violated a long-standing media taboo -- one that it's time to retire. Rape may once have been a threat to a woman's reputation. But surely that horrible era is past, and everyone now knows that shame should adhere only to the attacker, and not to the attacked.
Indeed, by continuing to drape accusers in the cloak of anonymity, the media perpetuates the antiquated and repellent idea that a rape victim might somehow have cause for shame.
For all involved, rape is a serious charge, and the accused is tarred whether guilty or not. It's doubtful the charge is often made lightly, but in fairness, if the accused is to be named, why not the accuser? Making both names public might even help get at the truth.
Disclosure can't be an ironclad rule; the media will always have to exercise discretion. Sometimes the accuser's name ought to be withheld, perhaps for reasons of personal safety. But these cases are the exception. The time for a policy of blanket anonymity is past.
