IN GENERAL, ENGLAND HAS MORE LEGAL RESTRICTIONS ON THE PRESS THAN DOES THE U.S., BECAUSE IT HAS NO CONSTITUTIONAL PROHIBITION OF PRESS RESTRICTIONS. JAPAN HAS FEW PRESS RESTRICTIONS; RUSSIA, MANY. BECAUSE OF ITS SEXUAL COMPONENT, RAPE IS A PARTICULARLY SENSITIVE ISSUE, TO WHICH FEMINIST WRITERS HAVE DEVOTED CONSIDERABLE ATTENTION. THE DESIRABILITY FOR PRIVACY FOR BOTH THE VICTIM AND THE OFFENDER, IS A MAJOR ISSUE. IN ENGLAND, REGARD FOR PERSONAL PRIVACY HAS TAKEN PRECEDENCE OVER PRESS LIBERTY IN CASES OF DIVORCE, BLACKMAIL, AND OTHER AREAS, AS WELL AS FOR RAPE. RESTRICTIONS HAVE ALSO RESULTED FROM CONCERN THAT REPORTING OF THE CRIME WOULD BE DETERRED, AND THAT THE VICTIM COULD BE EMOTIONALLY HARMED, BY PUBLICITY. IN THE U.S., FEMINIST EFFORTS TO REFORM THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM'S HANDLING OF RAPE HAVE NOT FOCUSED ON THE MEDIA, PERHAPS BECAUSE THE MEDIA TRADITIONALLY HAS NOT REPORTED VICTIMS' NAMES. SOME STATE LAWS PROHIBIT NAMING VICTIMS, BUT IN 1975 THE SUPREME COURT ENDED PROHIBITION OF PUBLISHING NAMES FOUND IN PUBLIC RECORDS. ENGLAND'S PROHIBITION OF PUBLISHING OFFENDER'S NAMES APPEARS TO BE FOUNDED IN PARLIAMENTARY MEMBERS' CLASS AND SELF-INTEREST. THE MAIN ISSUES RAISED BY THESE COMPARISONS ARE MEDIA'S POTENTIAL HARMFUL LABELING OF VICTIMS, ITS EFFECTS ON THE SOCIAL CLIMATE ENCOURAGING OR DETERRING RAPE, AND ITS EFFECTS ON VICTIM REPORTING OF RAPE TO POLICE. IT IS CONCLUDED THAT MEDIA SHOULD ADOPT THE AMERICAN APPROACH, AND THEREFORE IDENTIFY THE VICTIM MORE OFTEN, AND SHOULD NOT SHIELD THE ACCUSED RAPIST. SENSATIONALISM OR BIAS SHOULD BE AVOIDED, BUT THE NEED FOR ACCURATE INFORMATION APPLIES TO RAPE JUST AS IT DOES TO OTHER CRIMES. A BIBLIOGRAPHY IS INCLUDED. (CFW)