I’ve been a Jezebel reader/lurker for going on three years now. One of the things that drew me to the site was its attention to creating an intelligent and supportive commentariat, mostly made up of woman-identified people (though not entirely) who communicated openly with the editors about their expectations and standards. Though the comments section was never as on-point with questions of race and nationality as I would have liked (I get why LaToya hated writing about race for Jezebel), in recent months that seemed to improve some. I’m thinking, specifically, of Melissa Harris-Perry’s excerpt from SISTER CITIZEN that was published there a few weeks ago.
And then last week, Anna North (with whom I’m currently terribly embarrassed to share a first name) published a story that included still shots from the rape of a British journalist in Libya. Shots that showed the woman’s body, along with other identifying features. When the commentariat (rightfully) called her on this terrible decision, the editors issued a terse note justifying their decision to publish the photos on the grounds that “the video is the story, so removing the photos would be un-reporting it.” Rather than taking down the photos, they increased the pixellation on them (which made one photo look much more invasive than it really was). Many long-established, starred commenters who complained about the editors’ approach were summarily banned. Others requested to be banned; others left angry comments and flounced out.The woman in the video could have easily been any of us. I know for damn sure I wouldn’t want my rape broadcast all over the Internet, and it shocks and disappoints me that a site known for its anti-rape activism would choose to publish photos so potentially damaging to the victim. It violates basic journalistic ethics, not to mention the set of ethics the site itself tends to preach. The writers must know by now how many survivors read Jezebel. You don’t sell out your readership for page views.
I’ve never been a Jezebel commenter, but goodness knows I’ve contributed to Jezebel’s (and Gawker’s) page views over the years. That’s all over now. I won’t be reading Gawker daily anymore, either, as I’m certain the new Gawker editor had something to do with this series of poor decisions— even if only to help create a culture where page views are more important than journalistic integrity. Anyway, the Persephone Magazine article linked to above breaks down precisely what’s so fucked up about all this in clearer terms. Check it out.
If you read Jezebel, read alladat above and click the link. Not okay.
