Chencho Dema

Paro— The media’s role in balancing the duty to inform the public with the ethical responsibility to protect identities of individuals accused of crimes is increasingly under scrutiny, particularly when it comes to the practice of naming and shaming in news reporting.

This issue was a key topic of discussion at the annual journalism conference (AJC), hosted by the Journalists’ Association of Bhutan (JAB) in Paro yesterday.

Media agencies often reveal the identities of individuals accused of crimes before formal charges are even filed. This practice can result in media trials, where individuals are subjected to public judgment and stigma based on unverified allegations.

Most journalists agreed that naming and shaming often breaches media ethics, though some argued it can serve the public interest in certain cases.

Chimi Dorji, executive producer of BBS Radio, highlighted the need to distinguish “naming” and “shaming”. He explained that while naming suspects or convicts aligns with the media’s role of informing the public, shaming them crosses ethical boundaries. “A journalist’s responsibility is limited to naming, not shaming. The media’s duty is to present verified facts to the public, not to pass judgment,” he said.

Wangchuk, a freelancer, said that media should refrain from engaging in naming and shaming, as it can have far-reaching consequences for victims, their families, and the wider community. “In my observation, naming and shaming in the media has not led to any positive change for individuals or society but rather it has strained community bond and disrupted harmony,” he said.

An official from Bhutan Information, Communication and Media Authority said that the media should neither name nor shame suspects, and leave such matters to the judiciary. “It creates a double jeopardy for the person. First, they are punished by the law, and then they face a media trial, which impacts not only them but also their family members,” he said.

Sangay Rabten, a senior reporter with Business Bhutan, said that media should avoid such practices, as they not only harm an individual’s reputation but also affect those associated with them. “The media can report the details of a case, but it should do so without naming or shaming,” he said.

The debate over naming and shaming in the media highlights a critical tension between the responsibility to inform the public and the ethical obligation to protect individuals from undue harm.

While naming suspects or convicts can promote accountability and transparency, shaming risks crossing into territory that damages reputations, disrupts families, and undermines community harmony.