A reader writes:

The obvious and sensible reform is to put the accused's status on the same footing as the accuser's. In the Duke lacrosse case, the accused men's names were all over the national media as probable rapists months before anyone had heard of Crystal Mangum. You think it's terrible being known as a rape victim? Try living as a rape suspect - even the proven-innocent kind.

Another writes:

The whole argument is outdated because of social media.

Just the other day there was a teenage suicide in my town. The local media wouldn't name the kid, I guess until relatives were notified, and the announcement given to the students the next morning was similarly sanitized. But my daughter reports that EVERY SINGLE STUDENT at the school already knew the name of the student before the official announcement, because it was posted on everybody's Facebook page.

The forum website run by the local newspaper was running a rearguard action, deleting or censoring forum posts that mentioned the name of the student. But it's an old mindset from the days when the conventional media had a monopoly on information distribution. No more. The same applies to rape victims; they're going to be outed anyway.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.