Few people want to be known as a victim - and why should they?

We may not have a formal constitution in this Country, but who are we to deny the individual a right to privacy? They aren't wrong doers?

I'm not questioning the right to privacy here. I am asking why it seems to be more prevalent these days (or that is how it feels to me) than from when I first started reading these reports online around 7 years ago. With the exception of sexual crime, most victims are named in court reports in the press, e.g. victims of assault are routinely named in the local press along with the convicted perpetrator. It just seems that more and more employees are requesting this anonimity and I wonder if it is due to job fears, fear of colleague reprisals or just generally greater awareness of the power of Google etc. in disseminating such info.

It seems that some journalists like to acquire as much information as possible about individuals for their media reports. Furthermore, many readers/viewers of reports have become conditioned to seeing such detailed information. In fact, why should reports even include the title phrase of this thread to explain that the persons involved have specifically requested anonymity? Surely the default position should be to respect personal privacy and just describe someone as, for example, "an employee in his thirties" unless he or she is agreeable to having his/her name and/or other details made known!