This research examines 80 news stories and news analyses (some 3,000 column inches) published in the New York Times between October 7 and October 28, 1991, regarding the allegations of Anita Hill that she had been sexually harassed by Clarence Thomas. The research finds that reporters framed all parties ‐ the two protagonists, the Senators, other experts, on‐lookers, and citizens ‐ as responding to the story in ways that were directly determined by different identity variables, which the reporters took up one at a time. That is, the reporters suggested that everyone responded because of their gender, race, or experience with sexual harassment. Meanwhile, the reporters held themselves out as uniquely purified of such tainting influences. Reporters did not disclose how their own standpoints might have been affected by their social identity.