WaPo reported that Racicot texted Platner that she needed a glute massage to which he understood as an invitation and replied that he would come over. She later changed her mind and told him not to come over. Politico never included this detail in their article and since they were the first to break the story, most people were not aware of this detail.
The video doesn’t do that.
Does the video do more than note the thing about asking for a massage?
Because that’s not a relevant fact whose omission is any sin of journalism, and if that’s all they have then releasing a YouTube video with that headline is absolutely victim blaming, even if indirectly.
The only appropriate rebuttal to a claim of sexual assault is a refutation of the facts claimed, ideally with a horrified “people who cross this line suck” commentary.
No set of external facts matters if you touch someone in a sexual fashion without their contemporaneous consent. Assertions of external facts existing even being noteworthy is vicirm blaming and helps rapists get away with it.
Most people aren’t going to watch the video, they’re going to react to the title unfortunately. Since you didn’t clarify that this doesn’t change anything in the body of the post, it really does look like you’re casting aspersions. Thanks for clarifying that you aren’t.