Why Do Men’s Legacies Matter More Than Women’s Safety?

When a Washington Post reporter was harassed after tweeting a link to the rape accusations against Kobe Bryant, the paper didn’t protect her—it punished her

Photo: Christian Petersen/Getty Images

Almost immediately after Washington Post reporter Felicia Sonmez tweeted out a link to an article about the 2003 rape accusation against Kobe Bryant, who died on Sunday alongside his 13-year-old daughter and seven others, the harassment began. Sonmez was harangued and threatened, her address posted publicly. In fear for her safety, she checked into a hotel.

On Monday, the Washington Post put Sonmez on administrative leave, noting in a statement that the paper was reviewing whether her tweets violated their social media policy, and saying that she “displayed poor judgment that undermined the work of her colleagues.”

Her tweet, which was presented without comment, linked to a Daily Beast article from 2016 headlined, “Kobe Bryant’s Disturbing Rape Case.” She also tweeted about the thousands of people who responded with abuse and threats, and noted that it “speaks volumes about the pressure people come under to stay silent in these cases.”

We can argue about when it’s appropriate to speak negatively about someone who has died tragically, and whether a person should be remembered by their worst moment. What is inarguable, however, is that a woman was punished — both personally and professionally — simply for drawing attention to a well-known allegation that reflected poorly on a beloved male celebrity.

It’s an outrageous reminder that institutions will protect powerful men’s reputations above all else — even a woman’s safety.

Washington Post media critic Eric Wemple writes that management asked Sonmez to take her tweets down, but that she was delayed because of the barrage of threats. Once the tweets were deleted and Sonmez had checked into a hotel, she found out she was being placed on leave; managing editor Tracy Grant told her in an email that her “behavior on social media is making it harder for others to do their work as Washington Post journalists.”

How a tweet pointing to an accurate news story would make life difficult for other reporters is unclear. What is obvious is that Sonmez was reprimanded for tweeting something important.

The Daily Beast article Sonmez linked to wasn’t salacious; it was a straightforward recounting of what happened in 2003: Bryant was accused of raping and choking a 19-year-old woman in Colorado. He was arrested and charged with felony assault, and the woman later requested the case be dropped because of the harassment and character assassination she faced. (In addition to threats from Bryant’s fans, the athlete’s defense team made a number of smears against the accuser, including that the vaginal trauma she suffered could have been from having multiple sexual partners over the course of several days.)

What is not often talked about, but is extremely important, is that Bryant issued an apology where he made clear he believed the woman when she said she did not feel their encounter was consensual: “Although I truly believe this encounter between us was consensual, I recognize now that she did not and does not view this incident the same way I did. After months of reviewing discovery, listening to her attorney, and even her testimony in person, I now understand how she feels that she did not consent to this encounter.”

A woman was punished — both personally and professionally — simply for drawing attention to a well-known allegation that reflected poorly on a beloved male celebrity.

Bryant also noted that the woman was not paid any money and that he did not doubt her motives for bringing the accusation forward.

The truth is that it was a remarkable apology, one that recognized at least some of the harm caused. In fact, in a 2016 interview, Neil Irvin, the director of the nonprofit Men Can Stop Rape, said Bryant’s apology stood in stark contrast to other high-profile men’s responses to allegations of harassment or assault.

“Kobe is the only accused individual who I’ve ever seen provide an apology in writing in my 16 years of doing rape prevention work,” Irvin said. “I read it and it fits with what I know about rape: survivors don’t lie… The question I’m left with is how do you honor Kobe’s statement and what appears to be his subsequent growth, without ignoring there was a survivor who also has to overcome the violence that Kobe admits to.”

If Bryant’s fans are looking for a way to reconcile their love and grief with the accusation, one way would be to consider this apology as a sign of someone who seemed to be taking stock of the hurt he caused.

All of which is to say: This is complicated. How to navigate reporting on a well-known person’s death and legacy — honoring the good they did while being honest about the bad — is not easy. Especially when you’re talking about issues of gender, sexuality, race, class, and celebrity.

Yet, instead of using this moment as an opportunity to take on the nuance of the issue, the Post bent to power over truth and placed Sonmez on leave. It seems the paper’s higher-ups decided, in the midst of a safety crisis for one of their reporters, that public relations were more important than Sonmez herself.

That’s not just wrong — it’s also misguided. Why would rape victims trust the Washington Post with their stories if they think the paper is more concerned with appeasing an online mob than holding powerful men to account?

So let’s not mince words about what happened: A powerful publication silenced a female reporter for tweeting about rape. No matter how you feel about Bryant, speaking ill of the dead, or reporters on Twitter — that doesn’t serve anyone’s legacy.