NY Times now basically outing Sandusky’s victims for no reason whatsoever
In Wednesday’s story in The New York Times, for example, a profile entitled “For a Reported Penn State Victim, a Search for Trust,” reporters Nate Schweber and Jo Becker write a profile so detailed that, even though they do not name him, googling certain information in the profile results in the young man’s name within seconds. The Patriot-News has learned that other news organizations, which did not have the young man’s name, have already done so.
Although the Times story has been all over the web, and of course the Times web site draws a huge amount of traffic on its own, we decline to link to it here.
The story quotes his next-door neighbor and names his neighborhood. It describes the detailed circumstances of a car accident which was reported in local papers at the time. It says he liked to wear tie-dyed socks.
None of these details have the slightest to do with why or how the boy was allegedly befriended and then assaulted over several years by Sandusky. They do not serve the story of Jerry Sandusky. They only serve to make an alleged victim of sexual assault easily identifiable.









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
The logical person will see this and come to one conclusion: the media doesn’t — at the end of the day — care about the victims.
englishqueen01 on November 24, 2011 at 9:56 PM
The people have the right to know the exact identities of pedophilia victims.
At least the Times’ treasonous explication of US troop movements during the Iraq War can be rationally explained by hatred for George Bush. What, exactly, does outing these boys serve? It’s sad that the question isn’t even rhetorical.
HitNRun on November 24, 2011 at 10:02 PM
It serves no purpose whatsoever, it’s just an awful thing to do and the media (especially the NYT) is littered with awful people. These reporters live in an alternate universe where decency simply doesn’t exist.
Their tactics used to be (logically) blamed on just selling more newspapers, but that isn’t the case anymore. It’s a mindset of power over other people(victims)because they like how it feels.
Awful, awful people.
Tim Zank on November 24, 2011 at 10:21 PM
He’s just a flyover kid living in flyover country. No one on the UES would care.
Greg Toombs on November 24, 2011 at 10:45 PM
You know what, screw these people.
How about we all contact Nate at his house to let him know what a slimeball he is:
Nate Schweber
Age
33
Date of Birth
11/15/1978
Phone Number
406-543-7654
Additional Phone Numbers
406-549-2466, 406-728-7499
Most Recent Address
29 S 3rd St, Apt 3B, Brooklyn, NY 11211-5101
Linkedin Profile here.
Took me 5 minutes and $1.99 to find you Nate. Hope your life turns into a hell worse than that kids.
BacaDog on November 24, 2011 at 11:40 PM
This is the same paper that was contacting Bridget McCain’s high school classmates in 2008 to try to find somone to say what a mean mom Cindy was.
Wethal on November 24, 2011 at 11:58 PM
Sad.
I feel certain the NYT is better at protecting women who claim to have been sexually assaulted. I don’t understand this lack of care.
MayBee on November 25, 2011 at 12:51 AM
They believe the highest form of human evolution is a lifestyle which is predicated upon performing a certain deviant sex act.
Now, exactly why they have such a view is open to speculation. Nonetheless, they do not see a victim under these circumstances.
Hope this info helps.
platypus on November 25, 2011 at 1:40 AM
Which is why you should all cancel your subscriptions for their rag, cancel your cable, stop going to “Liberal” sponsored nonsense like movies or concerts, and focus on strengthening your family and your Conservative values.
KMC1 on November 25, 2011 at 2:11 AM
Are they the ones who wanted to unseal the adoption records of Chief Justice John Roberts children?
Blake on November 25, 2011 at 3:21 AM
Yes, that was the New York Slimes, too.
Wethal on November 25, 2011 at 7:24 AM