# Staff Notebook
## John Ford Anonymity of student necessary from a humanitarian viewpoint 
### 
I WROTE AN ARTICLE for Tuesday's
Daily on a freshman injured at a Phi
Delta Theta party. When I had fin
ished with it, his name had not been men
tioned. I used references to "the victim"
and"the student" instead of citing his
actual name. I made the decision not to
use his name, and told an editor about it,
after I spoke with the injured man in his
hospital room.
My decision was overturned sometime
around 11:45 p.m. the night before it ran,
when The Daily decided the name of the
individual was too newsworthy to leave
out. I disagreed, thinking the news lay in
the injury itself and the safety of parties
in general, not in the individual's name.
If an athletic team member or a stu
dent government official was severely
injured, the person's identity would be an
important component of the story. Also,
if the incident were of independent
importance, such as a suicide, The Daily
would have the right and responsibility to
print the individual's name.

I felt, though, that the person's status
as a freshman rushee and the issue it
brought up was much more important to
the article than his actual name.
Indeed, it could be said that the indi
vidual's name is news, and we should not
withhold news from the campus.
However, responsible papers and maga
zines often withhold what could be consid
ered "newsworthy" items in order to pro
tect and ensure fair representation of indi
viduals, governments or organizations.
The Daily covers incidents that affect
Stanford, and we as student reporters
should keep in mind who we are inform
ing with our pages.
It is not only a community we are report
ing on, it is a community with which we are
personally involved, and a community of
which we are intensely a part — much
more so than the employees of The New
York Times are a part of their community.
Our unique closeness with the com
munity should be reflected in a newspa
per that has as much concern for individ-

uals as it does for aggressively reporting
newsworthy items.
In that case, perhaps The Daily was
not correct in emulating the "profession
alism" of the mayor newspapers. Maybe
by not reporting all the "news," The
Daily can continue to keep the communi
ty informed and also respect the emo
tions of our sources, or better said, our
fellow students and administrators.
The incident at the Phi Delt party
speaks directly to the point. The student
was injured severely and wished that his
name not be used.
He was in pain, and I was told he was
very distressed over the prospect of hav
ing his name exposed to each and every
classmate and teacher of his. I felt strong
ly that the article should be written, but
that there should be room in The Daily's
newsroom for compassion for a fellow stu
dent. I then wrote the article as accurate
ly as I could, but did not include a name.
It was not my design when writing the
article to preserve his identity complete

ly. I realized that anyone who saw his
condition the following week would
understand who the individual was.
However, there is a difference between
that understanding and having your
name become part of campus-wide dis
course, if only for a day.
In addition, any rumors about the iden
tity of the individual would be contained
within the select group that knew about
the party, whereas the printed name would
be made known to an entire readership.
My editors told me that by not printing
the name, I could cause undue hardship
to anyone who might mistakenly believe
their friend was the one injured. Clearly,
friends of the rushees would have been
fully informed in a matter of days. To pre
vent this minor confusion at the expense
of causing one student tremendous pain
seems to me a bit like cutting off an arm
for the sake of some poison ivy.
Fraternity members and one fellow
rushee pleaded with me to preserve the
injured student's anonymity. It was clear

that protecting their friend was of much
greater importance to them than pre
venting easily resolved rumors about
themselves.
No matter how sober and responsible
the victim was, his name, if not his self
esteem, will in some way be tarnished by
this experience. The report, no matter
how fair it was to the victim, will end up
causing him pain.
Unlike the stigma the community
placed on first-year law student Keith
Rabois for his homophobic remarks, the
stigma that will be borne by this particu
lar member of the freshman class has
been undeservedly placed.
In conclusion, I believe reporting the
name of the individual, and thereby sin
gling him out, will go a long way toward
making his life difficult. Instead, an arti
cle exactly similar in content without the
name would encourage readers to look
less at the culpability of a specific person
and more at abstract problems we all may
need to address.