By Denen Achussah
Sexual and Gender-Based Violence (SGBV) is often presented in the media as a collection of isolated incidents — a rape case here, a domestic violence case there, a child marriage story somewhere else. But behind these individual reports lies a much larger problem rooted in unequal power relations, harmful gender norms, discrimination and social attitudes.
For journalists, therefore, understanding SGBV is not merely an academic exercise. It is central to responsible journalism. The way a reporter describes a survivor, frames a headline, selects an image or approaches an interview can either help a victim find justice or deepen the trauma already suffered.
SGBV, according to experts, refers broadly to acts committed against a person’s will because of gender norms and unequal power relationships. It can result in physical, sexual, psychological, emotional or economic harm. It affects women, girls, men and boys, although women and girls experience it disproportionately because of entrenched gender inequalities.
This definition is important because not every violent act is necessarily gender-based violence. The gender dimension, unequal power relationships, discrimination, and harmful gender norms or expectations associated with masculinity and femininity must be considered.
That broader understanding also means journalists must look beyond the familiar language of rape and domestic violence. SGBV includes sexual violence such as rape, incest, sexual assault, sexual exploitation, forced prostitution, sexual slavery, marital rape and sexual coercion. It also includes physical violence such as beating, burning and strangulation; psychological and emotional abuse such as humiliation, threats, isolation and controlling behaviour; and economic violence through financial control, denial of employment, property confiscation and inheritance denial.
There are also harmful traditional practices, including female genital mutilation, child and forced marriage, harmful widowhood practices and other cleansing rituals. Increasingly, violence is also moving into the digital space, with cyberstalking, online harassment, non-consensual sharing of intimate images, doxxing, deepfake pornography, cyberbullying, impersonation and online blackmail becoming part of the SGBV landscape.
The violence behind closed doors
One of the most disturbing aspects of SGBV is that much of it happens in places ordinarily regarded as safe.
Dr Tim Anienonam, a communication expert, cites figures indicating that intimate partner violence remains a major form of abuse, with 98 per cent of domestic violence victims reportedly experiencing abuse by intimate partners. He further cites African Women in Media as reporting that 76 per cent of GBV incidents occur in domestic settings.
The implication for journalism is significant. The media cannot afford to treat SGBV merely as sensational crime stories. A woman beaten by her husband, a child forced into marriage, a student sexually harassed or a person subjected to online abuse are not simply individual incidents. They can be manifestations of deeper social, cultural and power structures.
This is where journalism must move from episodic reporting to contextual reporting.
A report should not end with what happened. It should also ask: Why does this keep happening? What social norms permit it? What institutions are responsible for intervention? What laws protect the survivor? Where can the survivor obtain help? What can communities do to prevent similar cases?
The power — and danger — of the newsroom
Every SGBV story passes through several editorial decisions: the headline, photograph, language, angle, sources and placement.
Each decision can either protect the survivor or expose her to another layer of humiliation.
A headline that focuses on what a woman was wearing, where she went or whether she had been drinking can subtly shift attention from the alleged perpetrator to the survivor. Similarly, a report that describes an assault in unnecessary graphic detail may attract readers but can also sensationalise the survivor’s suffering.
Journalists are, therefore, challenged to examine their own practices.
Does our language support survivors or stigmatise them?
Do our headlines encourage justice or feed sensationalism?
Do our images preserve dignity or expose victims to further humiliation?
Does our reporting explain the circumstances surrounding violence or merely reproduce stereotypes?
These are not cosmetic editorial questions. They can influence public attitudes, the willingness of survivors to report abuse and the broader fight against SGBV.
Killing the myths
Another major obstacle is the persistence of myths.
The training asks participants to consider several statements: that only women experience SGBV; that marriage automatically implies consent to sex; that psychological abuse cannot be as harmful as physical abuse; that clothing causes rape; and that survivors often delay reporting because of fear or stigma.
These assumptions are dangerous because they can influence not only public opinion but also the way journalists report cases.
Men and boys can be victims of sexual violence. Marriage does not eliminate the need for consent. Psychological and emotional abuse can cause profound harm. Clothing does not cause rape. And survivors may delay reporting because of fear, shame, stigma, economic dependence, threats or lack of confidence in institutions.
A journalist who does not understand these realities can unintentionally reproduce the very stereotypes that make SGBV difficult to confront.
From reporter to watchdog
The media’s role should therefore go beyond documenting victims and perpetrators.
Journalists can expose institutional failures, question harmful practices, challenge discriminatory norms and highlight successful interventions. They can bring experts into the conversation, explain relevant laws and provide information about available support services.
Most importantly, journalists can help change the public conversation from “What did she do to cause it?” to “Why did he do it, what allowed it to happen, and what can be done to prevent it?”
That shift is crucial.
The media should not become an additional courtroom where survivors are put on trial by headlines, photographs and insinuations.
SGBV is also a human rights and public health issue
Understanding SGBV as a human rights violation changes the way it should be covered.
It is not simply a private family matter. It is not something to be dismissed as “domestic issues”. Harmful traditional practices should not automatically escape scrutiny simply because they are described as culture.
SGBV involves fundamental questions of dignity, bodily integrity, equality, safety and access to justice.
It also has consequences beyond the immediate incident. Survivors can experience physical, psychological, emotional and economic harm, while fear and stigma can discourage others from reporting abuse.
This makes SGBV a public concern that requires the attention of government institutions, communities, law enforcement, health professionals, civil society, and the media.
The new frontier: Digital violence
The growth of social media has created another challenge for journalists.
Technology-facilitated SGBV can spread much faster than traditional forms of abuse. An intimate image shared without consent can be replicated thousands of times. A threatening message can follow a survivor everywhere. A deepfake can damage a person’s reputation even when the material is fabricated.
For journalists, this demands particular caution.
The fact that an image or video is circulating online does not mean it should be republished. The journalist’s responsibility is not simply to reproduce what is already available but to consider whether publication serves the public interest or merely exposes and retraumatises the survivor.
What responsible SGBV journalism should look like
Responsible reporting requires journalists to provide social and legal context, avoid language that suggests survivors are responsible for their abuse and use expert sources to explain the structural causes of violence.
It also means highlighting prevention, available support services and examples of positive community responses.
Most importantly, journalists must remember that the survivor is a person, not content.
A good SGBV report should therefore be accurate without being sensational, detailed without being exploitative, and powerful without stripping the survivor of dignity.
The central lesson is simple: the media does not merely report reality; it helps shape how society understands reality.
When journalists reinforce stereotypes, they can help normalise violence. When they challenge those stereotypes, protect survivors and investigate the structures that enable abuse, they can become an important force for prevention and justice.
For Nigeria’s media, the challenge is no longer simply to report that SGBV happened.
The greater responsibility is to tell the story in a way that helps society understand why it happened, holds those responsible to account, protects the survivor and makes it less likely to happen again.
