Hacker News Reader

Comment by fallingknife | Hacker News Reader

So somehow the ethics change based on the severity of the crime they are suspected of?

Their excuse for this is that more severe crimes are more likely to have follow up news articles indicating if the suspect was charged, found guilty, whatever.

This change is an important one to make and signals at least a recognition of the issues involved and a desire to do better. Hopefully the tides continue to shift in this same direction and fewer peoples lives will be ruined by their worst decisions or by simply being at the wrong place at the wrong time.

> we now will no longer name suspects in brief stories about minor crimes in which there is little chance AP will provide coverage beyond the initial arrest .... We will continue to identify suspects by name in stories on significant crimes, such as murder, that would merit ongoing news coverage. In these cases, naming a suspect may be important for public safety reasons. These guidelines also do not include stories about active searches for fugitives.

The article suggests major crimes typically receive follow up articles, hopefully including whether a suspect was acquitted.

> The article suggests major crimes typically receive follow up articles, hopefully including whether a suspect was acquitted.

Maybe AP (and news outlets in general) should make a further commitment to write a "concluding" story about any crimes where they do publish a name, so that there's a news record of the outcome with respect to conviction/acquittal.

You may notice some publications pick and choose who they’ll publish names of, and that can be a reason why: if they publish the name, it’s because they’ll be following the case and publishing its outcome, while if they don’t, it’s because they don’t intend to do so.

The article hints that (ostensibly) the reason the policy only applies to minor crimes is that they often do not hear back on what happened with minor cases. Presumably, high-profile cases will receive lots of follow-up attention, including naming the suspects found innocent.

Again, ostensibly.

Nitpick: in most countries, you cannot be 'found' innocent, you are presumed to be innocent and can only be found to be 'not guilty' or 'guilty.'

Being found not guilty is being found innocent, since those are the same thing.

Having charges dropped is different; there's no finding in that case.

In theory in the U.S. you are not found innocent-- the charges just weren't proven beyond a reasonable doubt by the prosecution.

In theory the jury could think you are a murderer, but they had a "reasonable doubt" so voted not guilty.

Being presumed innocent is not a court finding. The bar is much lower.

So what? Being found not guilty is a court finding, and it is a finding of innocence. "Innocent" and "guilty" partition the entire space of states.

Even without going into nuanced situations, someone can be found criminally not guilty but civilly liable for the exact same actions, because there's enough evidence to say they're probably guilty but also reasonable doubt.

"More than 50% certain of guilt" is not "found innocent".

They explain in the article that such minor stories rarely get follow-up, so you'll never hear if they get exonerated / found innocent. Whereas if, say, Bill Gates gets arrested, they'll be a lot more likely to post updates and further clarifying information.

Just from personal intuition, I'd also expect that a lot of sources would be name-dropping "Bill Gates got arrested" even if the AP tried to keep it quiet, so there's less value.

As noted elsewhere, you cannot be "found innocent". The accused is presumed to be innocent. They can be found guilty, subject to some standards based on the circumstances.

This misconception is precisely the reason for this policy change.

From the article:

> This policy of not identifying suspects by name applies to minor crime briefs. We will continue to identify suspects by name in stories on significant crimes, such as murder, that would merit ongoing news coverage. In these cases, naming a suspect may be important for public safety reasons. These guidelines also do not include stories about active searches for fugitives.

To be fair you do have a point that in many countries it's customary to not mention the full name of the suspect no matter how serious the crime.

Hey, some ethics are better than none. I'm desperate for any news company to show a sliver of integrity at this point.

> I'm desperate for any news company

I will never go back being that naive again, there are no news of consequence, only propaganda.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com