To the editors:

I agree with many of the sentiments expressed by Edward G. Smith '97 on acquaintance rape (Opinion, Feb. 23), although I feel the likening of rape to murder is indefensibly extreme. Where I disagree with him most pointedly, however, is in his dismissal of the debate over The Crimson's coverage of the arrest of Joshua M. Elster '00. Smith claims that this debate is "misdirected," taking our attention away from the issue of campus rape itself, which he seems to feel is the only real problem to come to light following Elster's arrest.

Though rape itself obviously deserves a lot of our attention, I feel that the issue of judicious and fair media coverage of this crime is also an important topic. Smith evidently is not so concerned about this; in supporting his position, he asserts that "all the personal harm possible from character misrepresentation or even from defamation, whether valid or not, is greatly out-weighed by the harm experienced by a victim of sexual assault."

This statement disturbed me greatly. Does Smith actually feel that it is acceptable for Elster or anyone else, guilty, innocent or awaiting trial (as Elster is), to be excoriated on the front page as long as it brings attention to a pressing social problem? Probably not, but his highly incautious language suggests as much. In contributing to the campus-wide discussion on the sensitive issue of rape, Smith ought to be a bit more careful than that. R. BRIAN SOMMERVILLE '99   Feb. 24, 1998