This study examines the underlying values and practices in journalistic policies and decision-making between Japan and the United States on whether to identify youth offenders in serious, capital crimes. Benchmarks in youth crime coverage, particularly in Japan, are examined. Comparative data is presented from a survey of U. S. and Japanese journalists on factors that might influence naming of youth offenders, and on opinions regarding the handling of specific youth crime cases. The findings confirm the conventional wisdom that Japanese journalism remains consistent in its collective policy to not name juveniles under the age of 20 in any crime story, regardless of the severity of the crime. U. S. journalists, on the other hand, are constant in their inconsistency in terms of a policy on naming juveniles and seem to have adopted no policy, or no minimum age, as their policy. The distinction could be attributed to the difference in legal systems, journalistic values, and realities of juvenile crime between Japan and the U.S.