A simple question: Do you know the name of the child in Sandanski who allegedly was sexually assaulted by his father? If you understand Bulgarian, watch television and read newspapers and websites, I am sure that you probably do.
 
About six years ago, a long list of Bulgaria’s media queued up to sign a code of ethics, broadcasting images and publishing photographs of themselves doing so. Most television stations broadcast interviews with their respective editorial executives and other bosses piously holding forth about having done so.
 
Let us return to that code, and quote from it, specifically paragraph 2.4, which deals with coverage of children.
 
Here is my translation of the provisions of the first, third, and fourth sub-paragraphs: that the signatories will "exhibit a special responsibility to respect the rights of children, including their right to be heard", "will not post information or pictures (affecting) the privacy of children, unless there is significant public interest", will "not disclose the identity of children caught up in trouble or affected by crime, where this could harm them".
 
I know the name of the child; I have an idea of where he lives, because I’ve seen the apartment block. I know these things because I watch television every night and read Bulgarian-language news websites.
 
The facts of the case, as reported, in brief. The child was treated for injuries in hospital, more than once. After breakdowns in the system, which led to social workers failing to follow up the suspicions of medical staff, authorities finally became involved. The father has been arrested. The media have reported on the outcome of a lie detector test performed on the father. The media also have reported on neighbours, 200 of them, signing a petition against the child being removed from the custody of its mother.
 
Labour and Social Policy Minister Totyu Mladenov has pledged severe penalties for staff of Agency for Social Assistance and the Department of Child Protection who failed the child.
 
Those staff are not the only ones to have failed that child. Editors at some major media outlets in Bulgaria have questions to answer about the justification for identifying the child.
 
In journalism, and in laws and codes of ethics governing coverage of issues such as sexual assault, there is always a question about the definition of "identification".
 
In several countries, journalists and editors tend to err on the side of caution to not identify victims of rape and other forms of sexual assault. Apart from the person’s name, there are other issues such as identification through address, place of employment, type of occupation, and so on. I am not alone in believing that identifying a victim of sexual assault makes one complicit in compounding the trauma.
 
I know that in writing this blog, I have mentioned the name of the town where the alleged sexual assault took place. But given that Sandanski has a population, officially, of more than 30 000, I think I am safe in doing so. Had the incident taken place in a tiny village, I would not have named it.
 
However, through most major media, we have (a) the child’s first name (b) his father’s full name (c), as noted, visuals of his apartment block.
 
There are countries where had this kind of coverage happened, the reporters and editors responsible would be in the dock by now.
 
The point may be made that, subconsciously or not, journalists do not worry about considerations of law and ethics because the people involved in this story are poor, and so are unlikely to seek legal protection against unacceptable media coverage; we may all wonder what kind of coverage there would have been had the case involved a white-collar family. However, given what Bulgaria’s yellow press gets up to, that is another debate entirely; this blog is about what has been done by mainstream media that have signed a code of ethics.
 
And this is to say nothing of trial-by-media; one television station’s website has on two occasions described the alleged perpetrator in headlines as (unofficial translation) "father-rapist". We all know that Bulgaria’s judiciary, in many cases justifiably, may be open to criticism, but such language is, in my view as a non-lawyer and non-judge, contempt of court.

We all look forward to the day when Bulgaria's courts work properly, and perpetrators of child sexual abuse are handed the severest penalties allowed by legislation; but, even as a journalist, I believe that the media should not intrude into the space that must be reserved for courts of law.
 
These are matters of law; yet there is that code of ethics so publicly and proudly signed.
 
Most media in Bulgaria have done themselves proud in rallying to the cause of the children of Haiti, to give those children some hope of a future. That is well and good.
 
I wonder how they justify being accessories to the destruction of the future of that child in Sandanski.