Minors in the News: Naming Invites Further Harm

REPORTING MINORS in the news involves a number of ethical issues and considerations. Is the story newsworthy? Will the exposure or publicity cause them potential harm? The essential vulnerability of children and even teenagers below 18 is the principal concern.

Not all newsrooms are agreed about the naming of minors charged with serious crime, some saying that such “incompleteness” is unethical. Others believe that children and minors deserve to be given that extra measure of privacy to protect them from the permanent stigma of crime in their youth.

Bullying in schools has become a serious and widespread concern. The range of offenses is broad and cases vary; but the experience always involves suffering and emotional pain on the part of those who are bullied as it exposes deep seated problems on the part of the bully.

Republic Act 10627, the “Anti-bullying Act” of 2013 may have been a quick response to a complex issue and has left it to the Department of Education (DepEd) to formulate implementing rules and regulations.

Clearly, media should not treat bullying cases involving minors as crime stories.

A video showing a student physically attacking another inside a restroom in the Ateneo de Manila Junior High School went viral earlier this week. Two other videos showing the same student apparently assaulting others have surfaced. The first video has been taken down. But the footage sparked enough outrage online, with netizens, revealing more personal details about the student tagged as a “bully.” Other netizens participated in discussions on bullying, and praised those who identified and shamed the student. Still others, young and old, even called for physical retribution against him.

Some mainstream media picked up the story. Primetime newscasts were first to run stories on it but were careful to blur the faces of those involved and not mention the names.

Unfortunately, two newspapers went so far as to identify the high school student, a minor. CMFR jeers the news organizations which decided to give such prominence to this case and to go as far as to identify the boy and post his picture. Manila Standard ran an online story on December 21 identifying the student. The Philippine Daily Inquirer on December 22, gave it a banner headline on the front page, naming him in the article and posting his picture in an inside page.

In this case, school officials had already issued statements saying they are taking this matter seriously and are conducting their investigation. There are sanctions and punishments that have been set for these kinds of offenses in many schools.

Because “bullying” among children and adolescents may involve psychological as well as family problems, journalists should take greater care that young people, who may be rightfully punished, should still be accorded privacy.

Media should consider the greater harm that publicity can cause for all those involved and balance these values and the public’s right to know. Editorial judgment should take note of the severity of the offense and the minor’s age.

Adding to the damage caused by some social media users, the two broadsheets’ decision to publish details about the minor was careless. Minors including those who might be in conflict with the law deserve even more protection than adults. Minimizing harm is among their fundamental responsibilities and journalists should know better.

Bullying in schools is a public issue, a subject that the media should report in its various aspects. But the purpose should be to inform the public about how best to address the issues that make bullying so commonplace, not just in homes and in schools. The problem extends to work situations where power hierarchies continue to nurture the adult bullies of our society.