By this point we’ve all seen the image of Trump’s signature in Epstein’s “Birthday Book,” scrawled in his classic Sharpie-thickness, in a placement suggestive of pubic hair within a crude sketch of a woman’s torso. The whole tableau would come across as juvenile if it weren’t so sinister. (“May every day be another wonderful secret”—shudder.) Trump whines that the whole thing is a “dead issue,” while Americans across the political spectrum maintain a consensus of “beg to differ.”
At issue in today’s quiz are the headlines on this latest development in the case that won’t (and shouldn’t) die. Jeffrey Epstein pled guilty as a sex offender, a rapist, and a pedophile — he was convicted of soliciting a minor — who was arrested on federal sex trafficking charges. There is no reason for any reporting not to front-load those critical pieces of context. And yet: mainstream publications still seem disposed to euphemize his crimes, surrounding references to them with needless padding and flourishes of “allegedly,” “purported to be”-scented allusion.
Which of the below is the real headline from this week’s New York Times?
In Epstein’s ‘Birthday Book,’ a Celebration of His Lecherous Exploits
The book containing 50th birthday tributes to Jeffrey Epstein was released on Monday by the House Oversight Committee.
In Epstein’s ‘Birthday Book,’ a Record of Naughty Adventures and Good ‘Pals’
The book containing celebratory messages to Jeffrey Epstein was released on Monday by House Democrats.
In Epstein’s ‘Birthday Book,’ Good Old Boys and Bad Old Times
The book containing messages suggestive of Epstein’s criminal exploits was released on Monday by the House Oversight Committee.
Answer here.
There’s no reason this headline shouldn’t have been some version of “In Epstein’s ‘Birthday Book,’ Evidence of THE VERY SPECIFIC AND WELL-DOCUMENTED FACT THAT HE RAPED CHILDREN, AND THAT A LOT OF OTHER PEOPLE ARE EXTREMELY COMPLICIT AND MIGHT HAVE DIRECTLY PARTICIPATED, NOTABLY THE CURRENT PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.”
Ok, maybe something on the pithier and less all-caps side. But why not cut to the chase where it counts? Rarely are references to multiple acts of homicide, e.g., cloaked with this level of soft-pedalling; imagine a headline like, “In the serial killer’s journal, fond memories of his violent pastime.” Yet the media still has a hard time calling a rape a rape.
Could it be that our Adjudicated Rapist*-in-Chief is setting the tone for coverage of sexual assault? Seven years after the #MeToo movement, both the press and the rest of us have a responsibility to carry forward its momentum, centering the narratives of survivors and calling a pedophile rapist sex trafficker a pedophile rapist sex trafficker. Trump’s vision of a woman as a headless, inert object, 2-dimensional and overwritten by the chatter of terrible men, can’t be allowed to poison the public discourse any further.
* Straight from District Judge Hon. Lewis A. Kaplan, should any litigious MAGA sorts be reading: “The finding that Ms. Carroll failed to prove that she was “raped” within the meaning of the New York Penal Law does not mean that she failed to prove that Mr. Trump “raped” her as many people commonly understand the word “rape.” Indeed, as the evidence at trial recounted below makes clear, the jury found that Mr. Trump in fact did exactly that.”
Keep digging on this. The truth deserves the light of day and the victims deserve justice. No one gets to evade the truth or justice no matter how much money or power is involved.
IMHO the main stream press has 'sanewashed' Don the Con from day one, including all his misrepresentation in that larcenous "Apprentice" show. Money is the common denominator here - see the NYT article detailing JP Morgan's role in bankrolling J Epstein's criminal behavior.