Here's the thing.
Beyond the absurdity of punishing journalists for how readers might falsely judge them, sexual assault is all too common. Newsrooms are full of survivors because everywhere is full of survivors. You know survivors. You read survivors' work every day.
Beyond the absurdity of punishing journalists for how readers might falsely judge them, sexual assault is all too common. Newsrooms are full of survivors because everywhere is full of survivors. You know survivors. You read survivors' work every day.
https://twitter.com/feliciasonmez/status/1376274971207602184
Policies like the one being weaponized against Felicia do nothing but punish survivors who make the brave and extremely difficult choice to come forward — thus adding to the litany of reasons people don't.
And yes, as many people have said more eloquently than me, we need to abandon once and for all the ridiculous idea that the only people who can cover an issue fairly are those who have never been affected by it.
Conflicts of interest are obviously real, but they are not this. Covering news related to a person who sexually assaulted you is a conflict of interest. Being a sexual assault survivor is not a conflict of interest.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
