What would have been the responsible way to cover the Duke lacrosse rape case?

I've heard some people say the media acted irresponsibily when covering this case, that the reputations of some innocent people were ruined because of the way it was covered.
If that's true, what would have been the right way to cover it?

 

For starters, simply reporting the facts. I don't think necessarily it was the beat/crime reporters who acted irresponsibly than the columnists and TV talking heads practically calling for castration before all the facts were in.

Also, in retrospect, ignoring everything Nifong had to say would have been prudent.

 

Re: What would have been the responsible way to cover the Duke lacrosse rape cas

It is harder to cover a case fairly when the DA is making misleading statements and generally acting like an idiot. We know now that he was an idiot. But we didn't necessarily know that in the early stages of this story.

 

Don't presume guilt.

 

yup, what he said. and don't believe a skank stripper is always telling the truth.

 

All the factual reporting on this story (viewed from far away) seems to have been correct. A DA speaking is factual reporting, and if he's an idiot, it's our job to report as such.
Those who jump to conclusions re: guilt/innocence, whether in print or on the air, do so at their peril. To their reputation, at least, if not their pocketbook, should libel suits result.

 

If you don't report the names of the accuser, don't report the names of the accused. People are innoncent until proven guilty in this country, right?

That said, now that their names are out there and the accused is a pathetic liar, report her name!!!!