K.C. JOHNSON SPOTS SOMETHING UNUSUAL: Rare Two-Sided Reporting on Campus Sex.

I’ve often noted the poor, one-sided reporting on campus sexual assault—highlighted by a trio of publications (the Times, BuzzFeed, and Huffington Post) that seem to see their coverage more as advocacy than neutral reporting. In such an environment good journalistic work particularly stands out, as in Robin Wilson’s recent items in the Chronicle.

Wilson had one piece looking at one of the many anomalies of the campus crusade against sexual assault: why colleges, as part of an effort to diminish rapes on campus, don’t caution women about excessive drinking. The reasons, unsurprisingly, are a combination of government pressure against raising the issue and hard-line ideology. Wilson obtains a quote from Connecticut College’s “director of sexual-violence prevention and advocacy” (a quite unusually-named position): “The first things we hear are ‘What was she wearing?’ and ‘How much alcohol did she drink?’ . . . But those are not causing a sexual assault to happen. The perpetrator is the problem here.”

Quite so: just as a person who robs a student walking in a dangerous part of town is the “problem” in the commission of the crime. But is there any reason for a college not to warn students against behavior that might expose them to unnecessary risks?

Wilson also obtained a quote from Peter F. Lake, director of the Center for Excellence in Higher Education Law and Policy at Stetson University, who defended the lack of emphasis on potential accusers avoiding getting drunk in the following manner: “Sexual predators weaponize alcohol . . . Your typical sexual predator will stage an attack and place alcohol where it’s heavily camouflaged, in sweet drinks.” There have been dozens of OCR complaints filed by accusers, and myriad due process lawsuits filed by accused students. Allegations originating from “sweet drinks” rarely, if ever, have appeared in these actions. Doubtless some rapists spike the drinks of the students they eventually assault. But shouldn’t Lake have to present some data before insinuating that this sort of behavior is the norm?

Good reporting is the exception everywhere these days. And if you demand evidence, you’re a rape apologist!

Plus: “Presenting both sides of the issue has the effect of highlighting the extremism of the anti-due process activists. Perhaps that’s one reason why so many advocacy publications have chosen not to do so in their reporting on campus sexual assault claims.”