Yep. This is completely against how modern society deals with problems. We don't assume criminals are guilty until proven innocent, it's the other way around. The way a lot of these types want people to believe stuff with no evidence behind it because it's 'the right thing to do' is rather scary to be honest.

It's also a worrying symbol of a world where accusations seems to be more and more seen as evidence of guilt by the accused party. Where trial by media or court of public opinion seems to be valued more than the actual truth.

So no, we shouldn't automatically assume they're true. Investigate them sure, but treat it like any other crime or misbehaviour.

In the US, is very common for people who are arrested to be given the alternatives:

1. post a bail bond

2. incarceration

pending trial. I'm not offering an opinion on whether this is right or whether the US is a modern society. Just pointing to the reality of how the US deals with accusations of criminal behavior.

Taken very literally, it seems to contradict itself -- if we're assuming the reports are true, why even investigate?

The authors are responding to a tendency to assume harassment reports are false, and then not investigate.

We can see there is large zone of action between these two ideas. It's probably fair to say: don't dismiss harassment reports, investigate them.

Agreed. I'm all for investigating reports of bad behavior, but starting with any assumptions is a bad idea.