It is after many years of blogging that I cringe every time another woman is forced through a "trial by media," because she has brought up rape charges, especially when it is against someone that is high profile and loved by all. Our newest example is accusations against Pittsburgh Steeler Ben Roethlisberger. He has a lawsuit against him for allegedly raping a woman in a hotel last summer in Lake Tahoe.
Obviously, it would be premature to speculate the outcome of this lawsuit as this story has just out and I have learned that it is best to reserve those judgments for after the facts come out...or don't come out as the case may be. However, the story about the media and it's coverage stays the same. We can still evaluate the way the media portrays women when they bring about rape charges, the extent to which the general public will defend and accept athletes that have been accused (or down right guilty) of sexual assault, sexual abuse and/or domestic violence and lastly, why ESPN has failed to cover the story.
The story has only been out a few days, but people are already asking if she is "woman scorned," or comments on news sites continue to decry that she is "crazy and imagined it." Rape apologists will deny anything that makes their heroes look bad, but the evidence is clear, when a woman brings up a rape lawsuit publicly, she is considered guilty of lying or is deemed "crazy," "delusional" or "money hungry" before given any legal proceedings whatsoever.
Specifically in the arena of sports, rape apologisms permeate in damaging ways. Athleticism is a functional way for patriarchy and nationalisms to be celebrated. And given corporate take-over of most major sports, bloated salaries match the bloated ego of being one of America's superstars. And to be clear I am not anti-sports. I watch a lot of sports, I follow the NBA finals, I fight with people about outcomes. I love tennis, soccer, the Olympics. I even like playing sports. However, sports don't happen in a vacuum and it is a slippery slope from supporting your team, to aggressively supporting a team, to becoming violent on the day of the play-offs, to defending rapists because they represent everything you love. The toxic combination of masculinity, power, capital and influence can be blinding to many forcing the stories of women that have been abused at the hands of many of our "best and brightest" all the way to the margins. I feel like a broken record, but I can not emphasize this point enough.
Finally, ESPN's failure to report this incident further shows this demand to forget, sideline or silence the stories of women that complicate the images of well-known athletes,
Via Mike Florio at NBC Sports,
The handling of the Roethlisberger case makes us wonder whether there's a complete firewall between the business functions of ESPN and its journalistic activities. We say this because we're convinced that the Roethlisberger story initially was ignored due to concerns that ESPN would be jeopardizing its access to the two-time Super Bowl-winning quarterback, who also happens to play for the team with the most loyal and rabid fan base in America.Though the "do not report" memo did not cite a reason for the directive to avoid the story, word initially began to emerge throughout the day (starting first at Jemele Hill's Twitter page) that ESPN has a policy to not report civil complaints not accompanied by criminal proceedings.
Of course, if there truly were such a policy and if it were applied on an across-the-board basis, then there would have been no need for a "do not report" memo. And any such memo surely would have reminded the recipients of the policy regarding civil complaints without criminal proceedings, right?
You can read the rest here. Whether ESPN did it intentionally or not, failing to cover this case indicates that they have already taken a side. Let's not let the American public get away with another butchering of a public rape case.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Sports Culture, Rape Trials by Media and Roethlisberger. .
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/15115
I'm a huge sports fan, and yes I'd noticed the story quietly absent from much ESPN coverage. Though I do believe they're in general apologists for rapists (and generally bad reporters, but that's another topic I suppose), I think there are 3 possible reasons this story has not been reported much there.
In no particular order:
1. Roethlisberger doesn't have a squeaky clean image. After his motorcycle accident a couple of years ago, many people started to put a "bad boy" spin on his image. When Kobe Bryant was accused, people were shocked in large part because Bryant and his agents had done such an excellent job of creating a choir boy public image. I think you'd see that kind of reporting if this were one of the Mannings, for example, instead of Roethlisberger (despite the Peyton/trainer issue from his Tennessee days).
2. This happened a year ago, and it's not really clear yet why the woman waited this long to bring the suit forth. I'm not sure we'll ever know or that it matters, but I'm sure that's some of the reason.
She did not go to police. She apparently (at least from what's known so far) has made no attempt to get money from him. There's no rape kit. In other words, the story is "boring" from a sports news standpoint. She's filed a lawsuit; he'll respond. They probably won't go to court; there will be a private settlement. There's not much to report really.
3. This is a civil suit. He's not going to jail. If there were the possibility of jail and Steelers losing him, then it would matter more to fans.
I also think that with McNair's murder, the sports media has been in a private-life frenzy the past few weeks. Add to that the end of Michael Vick's probation, the start of training camp, the possibility of a Brett Favre return (again), and there's just a lot going on. Had she filed the suit in May, there would've been much more down time to report on it. As it is, the suit doesn't compete for time with the other stories swirling.
But there are confirmed sources acknowledging that ESPN sent out a "Do Not Report" memo this weekend. Which means the story did not slip through the cracks. Pretty clearly, ESPN wanted their reporters to know it was off limits, and even if they rescinded the memo, which I'm not sure they did, it was an unambiguous message to ESPN's staff saying "we don't want to touch this."
Sure, but we're not sure why they had the DNR memo. It may have been a conscious decision to cover up the story, but certainly they knew it would come out from other places. I don't think ESPN is blameless, but they have reported on the story, just not as a front-page banner story.
Brandi, I have to disagree that Rothlisberger had previously shed his good guy image. I don't know anyone that doesn't still see him as an All American Hero, especially due to the fact that he was not technically at fault in the motorcycle accident. Lots of people held onto that, even though he didn't actually have a license. Most people around here, I would say, think of him as the city's son.
I have to respectfully disagree; i live in the city and all I hear from people who have had contact with him is about his arrogance, cheapness, rudeness, and cockiness. And as far as the motorcycle accicdent though he may not have been at fault whe you make the money he does based on your ability to perform athletically you wear a helmet. Simple. The intersection where he wrecked is notoriously bad granted, but he has to bear some responsibility.
I'm not saying he doesn't bear responsibility. I also live in Pittsburgh, and haven't heard stories of personal interactions with him as you have, but from everyone I speak to, he is always portrayed as a golden boy. I think personal interactions with a sports star are few and far between and are not enough to change the public's general opinion, at least not in the circles I run in.
We can't forget race and what it means for the strange "Do Not Report" memo. ESPN claimed existence of a policy forbidding reporting on civil actions against players (weird anyway) but you know what? They do all the time, including just last month. The difference? Those players aren't white superstars like Roethlisberger.
Randy Moss, for example, was in a very similar situation last year, and ESPN still reported the story. But oh wait, Randy Moss is black. And from a small town in West Virginia. And generally disliked by sports audiences.
So, this is all tied up with race too. Thanks for bringing this up Samhita. Always glad to see Feministing take on sexism in sports. There is just so much!
And generally disliked by sports audiences.
I would argue that's not true in the way it was when he was just out of Marshall. Playing for the Pats seems to grant some level of like among casual fans.
But when the allegations broke, the pats were a polarizing force, in the playoffs after the first undefeated 16 game season in history. Half of the sports world wanted to see them fail, and most of the sports world still disliked Moss from his tenure in Marshall, Minnesota & Oakland.
My point is that yes, ESPN protects athletes and yes, they do so unevenly to preserve ratings and relationships.
Also, now IS downtime for sports media. Only one major American sport is in season (baseball), and even that is in the post-all-star midseason doldrums. That is precisely why tired Brett Farve fever has filled dead air in sports news. But ultimately, sports media creates athletes we root for and root against, and they are covered that way.
I think Brandi makes excellent points. (Not sure I agree with them all, but I think time will tell.) Celebrities get sued all the time for legitimite, or contrived, incidents. What makes this "newsworthy" is that it involves rape. If the suit had involved him decking a guy, or owing someone money it wouldn't really be terribly newsworthy. So a fair question is, given the specifics in this case, does the rape accusation alone make it newsworthy?
One other point, I don't really consider ESPN to be a "real" news outlet, in the same way that I don't consider E! to be a real "news" networks. The ethics & standards of celebrity news sites are virtually night & day to work a day journalism. It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if they didn't report this simply to protect an important relationship.
I didn't catch the ESPN coverage of the McNair death. Anyone know how long it was before they mentioned his girlfriend?
They acknowledged her as "a friend," at the very beginning, and that's how the police identified her. I don't think anyone bought that, but it was the next day before the AP, ESPN, etc. started saying that McNair's friends had confirmed Kazemi was his girlfriend. So, in that case I think they reported pretty much as soon as they could with sources to back them up.
I think the McNair case was so extraordinary, however, that it didn't have a precedent for how to handle it. Most murdered players I can think of have been killed in nightclub-related deaths or other shooting deaths with non-related people. With Sean Taylor, ESPN did post follow-up reports several times once more facts became available, mainly that Taylor didn't know the attackers, it was random, etc.
Pro football player Fred Lane was killed by his girlfriend several years ago and Sean Taylor was killed by an intruder two years ago. Before that, the last player killed in this was was Blenda Gay, whose throat was cut in his sleep.
I'm a Pittsburgher and a big Steelers fan. That said, I don't watch ESPN or listen to sports radio or any of that shit for the most part except for games because I can't stand listening to those idiots drone on. So HOLY FUCK, those ESPN assholes aren't reporting this? What fuckheads. The only thing I've heard was when I was driving home from work the day the story broke and was actually fairly impressed with what the guy talking on a local sports show was saying. Some caller was expressing doubt because no criminal suit was brought and being like, "oh, he's got his pick of women" (almost switched it off then). And then the host pointed out that rape isn't about sex, it's about power, which is especially important here.
When I first heard this, before I heard the actual story and just that the allegations were made, my first thought was, sigh, I wish I could be surprised. Not even because he's a football player, but because it's Ben. And a lot of Pittsburghers don't want to hear it, but Ben's a fuckhead. Like, seriously. And I think everyone knows it. When I did hear the story, I thought that it sounded totally in line with something that asshole would do.
Here's my solution: to hell with him. Let him go fight this case and probably justifiably lose and let's bring up Charlie Batch. Charlie's from around here anyway.
And as far as Randy Moss goes, I think playing for the Pats is BAD for his popularity. That said, no doubt race is an issue in all of this reporting.
Do you really think they'd can Roethlisberger, though? I mean, earlier today I was ready to say fuck you to the Steelers altogether; if they got rid of Ben I'd be happier but after two superbowls it's unlikely. I'm moving to Chicago soon, so maybe I'll be a Bears fan.
Holy Shit.
I live in Pittsburgh and I haven't heard a peep about this. True or not, it is absolutely disgusting that they keep it so hush hush.
I already know how it would go, though. Like almost any other accused or convicted major sports star, everyone around here will side with him, no one will believe her.
"The difference? Those players aren't white superstars like Roethlisberger."
I think that is a very sad, but important point, dangerfield.
I live in state college, basically the meeting grounds of eagles and steelers fans and the thought of the drunk, angry rape apology that will go on in the fall makes me cringe. I was in college when the duke rape allegations were brought to light and I remember how horrendous the comments were from some of my supposedly enlightened male peers were.
Seriously, I'm dreading drunk tirades from my Steeler loving friend.
I'm seriously exhausted from trying to get idiots to stop bashing women who havent even had an opportunity to prove their case.
Really? I'm home visiting the fam, and it was on KDKA yesterday and today, with opinions from the "fan on the street" I only saw a few, but it seemed like the men they interviewed were saying they didn't think he did it, she was lying, etc, and the women were saying that they hoped it wasn't true, but that they weren't going to decide one way or the other.
But KDKA has like 17 hours of news on in between the soaps, so it was hard to miss today.
Yeah, after he made a statement, it seemed, it was everywhere. I might not have been paying close enough attention, but it came across almost like they were waiting until he responded to give it any airtime.
I was at the gym this morning and this story went across the ticker on ESPN. It said Roethlisberger had been accused of sexual assault and then quoted his attorney as saying "my client has never sexually assault anyone." I guess that's as deep as ESPN is willing to go into this one.
I gather that she filed the suit a year later partly because she has needed considerable professional help to deal with the pyschological fallout and she lost her health insurance due to sporadic ability to work.
What shocks me most isn't the media's coverage - but the alleged corporate cover-up and tampering with evidence. It sounds like Harrah's simply decided to ignore her.
His lawyer said the "most compelling evidence" of false allegations are the timing of the suit and a lack of a police report? Her account states she went straight to the director of security the very next day.
There are many culpable and colluding parties in this case.
I'm a huge Steelers fan and a fan of #7 and I'm shocked to hear about this. I don't want to take sides yet, and I'll admit I'm biased towards Big Ben. But what I do find appalling is how the media is treating the woman involved in the case. What's even worse is the comments on those articles. I'll admit her story seems a bit questionable. The fact she brings this up a year after the incident is strange (although I guess this does happen frequently) and that it is a civil lawsuit instead of a criminal one. Other details in her story seem weird as well. But even if her allegations are not true, portraying her as crazy and a "slut" is inexcusable. I also find the media quietness about this appalling as well, like many of you have said. It also bothers me that people then make generalizations about women being gold diggers and most claims of rape being false. I'm trying not to make judgments on either side until I know more information. I'd hate to see someone I'm a fan of being guilty of rape. I guess I'm in denial or something.
"The fact she brings this up a year after the incident is strange (although I guess this does happen frequently) and that it is a civil lawsuit instead of a criminal one."
I could not have imagined, after my assault, going through with a trial even a year later, let alone immediately after. She reported it right away. She waited a year to press charges. big difference. And here, in PA, the law allows me 12 years to press charges if ever felt like I wanted to endure the scrutiny.
As for the criminal vs civil lawsuit--is is very difficult for the plaintiff to win a rape trial. In civil cases, the burden of proof is not as great.
http://www.rainn.org/get-information/statistics/reporting-rates
http://kdka.com/local/civil.criminal.case.2.1095367.html
It is easier to get a jury to rule in favor of a victim in a civil trial than in a criminal one. If I had been brave enough, and had enough evidence, and was going to press charges at all, it would have been in a civil suit.
I get your point about civil trial vs. criminal ones. But I heard that the police department in Nevada never received any report or complaint from her.
She didn't report it to the police (as many rape victims don't, I myself never reported my rape to the police). The reports I've heard have said she reported it to her boss as the hotel and they tried to sweep it under the rug.
I don't think the issue isn't that she hadn't initially gone to the police, but that now that she does decide to come out aout tis, she does so in a criminal court seeking to punish him via his wallet as opposed to going after him in criminal court to punish him by taking his freedom. Even now, she still has not filed a criminal complaint against him. Its purely civil and as anyone knows, civil suits are treated very differently than criminal ones.
But what is the point of a civil trial other than money? It doesn't deter him or prevent him from raping again. Most people don't take civil suits seriously and just as they are easy to win they are easy to appeal.
The lack of a criinal complaint and a rape kit allows for a lot of scrutiny. We have seen people lie about being raped, some do so for monetary gains. Nowadays, even a child who accuses rape is questioned when there aren't bruises and scars visible from the allegation.
This will not be easy but I hope for the validity of other rape allegations against celebrities that the allegations are true.
I think money is one part of it. She does want to be compensated for lost wages and therapy bills.
But more than that, I think a civil case just proves, if she wins, that she was believed, and that the assault was made known and shows rapists that they cannot expect just to get away with it w/o anyone saying anything. I think those are probably the most important things.
"It doesn't deter him or prevent him from raping again."
I disagree. To challenge a rapist on something and make it a know identity attached to his name likely deters him just as much as....oh, the 5 months he'd get in prison would.
"We have seen people lie about being raped, some do so for monetary gains."
Please don't push that myth. Estimates of false rape claims fall around 2%. Are you speaking of a specific case?
I agree that presupposing an alleged rape victim is lying is a big no-no and not backed up by statistics. And I still think it is highly inappropriate in this case or pretty much any case, but quoting the 2% stat here isn't really fair.
High profile male athletes are frequently charged with or sued over rape allegations. Many of these prove true and not enough come through to a guilty verdict or a damages award. HOWEVER, there have been many recorded cases of women serially accusing prominent athletes on unfounded rape charges. While this is no grounds to discount all or any rape allegations, this is far more common than the 2% stat. Rape cases with professional athletes or other famous people can't be said to reflect the patterns in the rest of society.
It is a pretty common report in sports media, to such a degree that I'm willing to bet this is part of the reason so many men believe rape allegations to have a high incident of falsity.
It is a pretty common report in sports media, to such a degree that I'm willing to bet this is part of the reason so many men believe rape allegations to have a high incident of falsity.
Hmm...that is a good point. Can you give me a couple examples of cases that turned out to be false charges? I'm not doubting your point, I just can't think of any.
I'm from Pittsburgh and just wanted to say i'm so glad that feministing is addressing this. The local radio coverage, Mark Madden in particular, has been horrific, victim blaming, and very (but predictably) biased.
Uh, does no one else take huge issues with this blanket statement:
"Athleticism is a functional way for patriarchy and nationalisms to be celebrated."
Atheleticism does not equal:
the NFL,
professional football,
corporate, for-profit sports,
etc, etc.
In certain contexts, sure. But that's not what the statement implied.
On second reading, this statement doesn't make sense at all.
Maybe the Olympics celebrate nationalism or any other world competition. And sure, other competitive sports can pit one team against another, which sometimes translates into pitting cities or neighborhoods against each other. But athleticism that's not "athleticism" doing that, it's competitive geographically-divided sports.
And "athleticism" doesn't celebrate the patriarchy either. Corporate-driven professional men's sports? Sometimes, probably often.
I'm currently visiting my family in Pittsburgh, and I had to carefully and laboriously explain to them that just because she 1) waited a year to come forward and 2) was pressing a civil suit rather than a criminal suit didn't mean she was lying. I _think_ they understand, especially when I pointed out that women who bring sexual assault charges against prominent figures are judged no matter how they handle the situation.
I am no longer a fan of the NFL after the Detroit Lions' 0-16 season. But nonetheless, I am a big fan of auto racing.
Also, Cara has excellent pieces about the rape culture in the sports world on the Curvature, with the most recent post about this coming on February 27.
Kate, thanks for the tidbit about civil trials and criminal trials for rape victims. I was kind of hoping that the victim would go to the Douglas County (Nev.) Sheriff's Office and file a criminal report. And then, when I read your post, I understood why she decided against a criminal complaint.
And as for the Pittsburgh media, shame on them for tearing this 31-year-old rape victim down.
Whoa Samhita always comes with the fire. We were talking about this. Me I'm a Steeler fan and I like Ben and I give him (and any accused person) the assumption of innocent til proven guilty--but the lack of coverage was astonishing. If this were LeBron it would have led every broadcast.
I totally cannot believe the way people are making this woman out to be, from reading comments on other news articles about it. Her situation sounds very plausible, but people seem to continue calling her a lier. One of the articles even quoted the security chief saying "Most girls would feel lucky to have sex with someone like Ben Roethlisberger." WHAT? The problem is, this alledgedly wasent sex, it was rape. It's really disturbing that people may not see the difference.
Here's a statement he made:
"I did not sexually assault [name deleted]," Roethlisberger said. "Saturday was the first that I learned of her accusations. Her false and vicious allegations are an attack on my family and on me. I would never, ever, force myself on a woman. I am going to fight to protect my family and my reputation. I'm not going to discuss my private life or this civil case in the media. I'll respond to her outrageous allegations in the appropriate forum. I have an obligation to our fans, to my teammates, to my coaches and everyone in the organization to remain focused on the Pittsburgh Steelers, and I will do that. The allegations against me are reckless and false. As much as I would like to answer everyone's questions, I'm going to respect the legal process and I am confident that the truth will prevail."
Something about this makes me think it's not genuine. I live in Pittsburgh and, according to many who've met him, he has a reputation of not really being that respectful to women. For example, he's always asking about "cute waitresses" and pushing up against women in restaurants. So that comment about him being a fuckhead, I think it can be confirmed.
There is a difference between being a fuckhead and a violent rapist.
If I could get millions by charging you for rape, I would do it.
"If I could get millions by charging you for rape, I would do it."
Would you really? I wouldn't. :| I can make enough money with my brains and talent without having to falsely accuse people of crimes to take money from them. Especially since that would damage real victims of a crime that isn't taken seriously enough to begin with. It would be hard enough for me to do even if I wasn't lying, because I would be exposing myself to all the bullshit that comes part and parcel with reporting rape in our society -- such as people who don't even know me, who don't know the facts, calling me liar, slut, backstabber, gold digger, when I would have done nothing wrong.
I have a funny feeling people like me are not in the minority here. You might be willing to do something like that, but that doesn't mean this woman would.
With the prospect of settling outside of court for millions it is little wonder that people scratch their head everytime an American sports pro, who has plenty of access as it is, is brought on trial by some woman, for a crime that happened at least a year ago in which evidence can not be collected.
I wonder why it is always American sports pros ?
Do you know how many sport professionals in Germany or Italy have been charged with similiar charges ? ZERO. Incidently women have no chance to get huge sums in those countries.
I am not saying sport professionals would not ever rape a woman, but the many women who file false charges for the money, hurt the victims.
Just remember Koby bryant.
Um, I don't think the Kobe Bryant case proves his accuser was lying....
The criminal charges were dropped because she didn't want to testify. She then brought civil charges, and he agreed to a settlement out of court.
I'm really disturbed by how "no evidence can be collected" and "over a year ago" are being used as proof that she's lying. In many sexual assault cases no evidence can be collected because there was none to collect to begin with. I know thats not the case here, but are those victims lying, too?
What can I say ? A mutliple million dollar ruling if you get the jury to vote in your favour is very very tempting. At least I am being honest.