Bachman's results suggested that differential reporting, even of acquaintance rape, is a problem of the past. This study takes exception to that conclusion for four primary reasons. First, it is debatable whether the analysis supported the conclusion that the relationship between reporting and knowing the offender was significant. Secondly, even if nonsignificant, the interpretation of the result was inconsistent with the classical logic of hypothesis testing and the use of significance tests. Thirdly, this author argues that there was no evidence presented of a change over time in reporting trends. Finally, the sample was not sufficiently representative of all types of victim-offender relationships to allow inferences to be drawn about acquaintance rape. 22 references