Eleven feminist institutions and initiatives criticized what they described as “parallel media trials” of harassment victims that accompanied some media coverage of an incident in which a young man was accused of harassing a young woman on a public bus.
In response Journalists Syndicate head Khaled Elbalshy said the syndicate is moving to add a full section on women’s rights in an update to the journalistic code of conduct.
In a statement issued on Wednesday, the feminist groups said some media handling of the incident, which trended on February 8, not only violated professional standards, but also “provided cover for violence” by focusing on the victim’s mental state and personal details unrelated to the alleged crime, turning the violation into material for doubt and public shaming.
The incident began with a video in which a young woman appealed to bus passengers about a young man she accused of harassing her. He later denied the accusation, before prosecutors released him on 1,000 Egyptian pound bail pending investigations.
In the wake of the incident, news websites published headlines questioning the victim’s mental health, before later changing the headlines after they sparked a wave of controversy.
The signatory groups, including Nazra for Feminist Studies, the New Woman Foundation, and Edraak Foundation for Development & Equality, said such media practices expose a clear gap between press regulatory frameworks and how the profession is applied in practice, especially in reporting on gender-based violence cases. They called for developing more particularized standards that reflect the sensitivity of these cases as human rights violations.
Elbalshy described some journalists’ involvement in victim blaming or justifying the violation as a “major professional mistake,” saying, “When someone is subjected to a violation, a journalist should not write about the victim’s mental state as if it were grounds for doubt. That is a serious professional breach, because it can read as a justification for the abuse. Victim blaming may be widespread socially, but journalists should not be part of it.”
Elbalshy told Al Manassa that such errors “happen very often” and have occurred in other cases, but said the syndicate has issued recommendations that treat victims as a special case. “The victim is protected, and it is not permissible to turn her into an accused person in one way or another. It is not permissible to harm her, and it is not even permissible to publish her details, personal data, and so on,” he added.
Amid calls from the feminist groups for clear measures to ensure media outlets adhere to professional standards, including developing guidance and activating accountability mechanisms, Elbalshy said there is a push within the syndicate to update the journalistic code of honor issued in 1998 by, for the first time, adding a full section on “gender and women’s rights,” designed to be more detailed in handling emerging concepts and protecting victims from stigmatization and defamation.
On the possibility of holding those involved in abusive coverage accountable, Elbalshy acknowledged a regulatory gap, noting that many violations come from digital platforms whose editors are not syndicate members. “We will study the women’s organizations’ statements, and if we find violations by registered members, we will look into disciplinary approaches, but it is difficult to reach nonmembers through our mechanisms,” he said.
The current journalistic code of honor stresses the importance of accuracy in documenting information before publication and respect for privacy and private life, warning against defamation, reputation damage, and exploiting the profession for personal gain.
