Key Highlights
- The Jeffrey Epstein case has shifted focus from powerful men on a ‘client list’ to the victims of abuse and trafficking.
- A new law mandates the release of nearly all Epstein-related files by December 19, 2025.
- Journalistic practices often prioritize powerful men over survivors in coverage, despite legal permissions allowing for naming victims.
- The tension between legal restrictions and ethical journalism raises questions about whose voices should lead a story.
The Shift from Scandal to Survivors: Epstein’s Victims Deserve More Attention
The Jeffrey Epstein case has long been shrouded in secrecy, with much of the public discourse focusing on powerful men rumored to be part of his ‘client list.’ However, as the legal landscape shifts, the spotlight is finally turning towards those who were actually victimized by Epstein’s actions.
Legal Mandates and Unsealing Documents
A significant development in this case came with the passage of the Epstein Files Transparency Act in November 2025. This law mandates that nearly all documents related to Epstein be unsealed within 30 days, with a deadline set for December 19, 2025. The act aims to provide transparency and potentially reveal more about the extent of Epstein’s criminal activities.
Survivor-Centered Reporting
Despite legal changes, the narrative in many news outlets still struggles to center on the survivors. A CBS Evening News report from December 12, 2025, focused on photographs of famous men with Epstein, rather than the girls and women who were victims. This highlights a broader issue within journalism: while the law now allows for naming victims, newsrooms often default to prioritizing powerful men over those directly affected by their actions.
Journalistic Ethics and Naming Victims
The core question at hand is whether journalistic practices should change in light of these new legal permissions. According to Stephanie A. (Sam) Martin, a friend of The Conversation and Frank and Bethine Church Endowed Chair of Public Affairs at Boise State University, the tension between legal restrictions and ethical journalism is profound. She notes that U.S. law permits naming victims, but newsroom ethics codes often discourage it.
“In cases like Epstein’s, powerful men are named, dissected, and speculated about,” explains Martin. “Meanwhile, the survivors, unless they step forward with great effort, remain a blurred mass in the background.”
The Role of the #MeToo Movement
The #MeToo movement has forced newsrooms to reconsider who should lead a story. While some high-profile men are still the focus of investigations and reports, the ongoing lives of survivors—whose abuse made these men newsworthy in the first place—are often overshadowed. This shift raises fundamental questions about whose voices matter most in journalism.
“We need to consider whether the most important part of a story like Epstein’s is the next famous name to drop or the ongoing lives of the people whose abuse made that name newsworthy at all,” argues Martin. “A more survivor-centered approach would start from a different set of questions, focusing on which survivors have chosen to speak and why.”
As the legal process continues, it remains to be seen whether this shift in focus will lead to meaningful changes in how survivors are treated by journalists and the public alike.