The legal systems of many countries should be modified so that the media can be held responsible for the damage they do through their reporting. This should include, but not be limited to, inciting hatred and invading privacy.
Nowadays, many men who are convicted or even just suspected of having had sexual contact, even allegedly consensual sexual contact, with a person below the legal age of consent are portrayed in the media as monsters.
Terms like “sexual predator” are no longer found only in tabloids but have made it into the vocabulary of conservative newspapers. They are no longer used only for men who have abused and murdered children. In some countries, they are commonly used for men who have had sexual contact with a person below the age of 18, even where the contact is presented as consensual.
Because the UN generally defines anyone below 18 as a child, and US law often does the same, the distinction between 7-year-olds and 17-year-olds sometimes gets lost (tabloids do not want to diminish the emotional impact of a story about a sexual predator by prominently noting that the person involved was, for example, a 17-year-old close to the age of consent).
It appears that some children who have been sexually abused are subsequently murdered. When perpetrators are caught, it may emerge that, in some cases, the murder was not planned.
In some cases, a child abuser may suddenly fear the publicity that could follow if the abuse is reported to the police and then covered by the press, which may treat the matter as a front-page story.
An abuser who fears the media frenzy more than the punishment may, therefore, decide to silence the witness (the abused child).
The media, with all the coverage about “sexual predators” and “monsters”, may thus bear some responsibility for some sexually abused children who are subsequently killed.
In any case, the media do not cover this topic for its deterrent effect, but simply for commercial benefit. Sex sells.