This paper shows that human rights reporting is an effective way to deter abuse. Past research has focused on the reaction of perpetrators to realized forms of shaming, finding mixed results. I argue that would-be perpetrators are more proactive than the literature on shaming suggests. In contexts were human rights conditions are systematically being monitored, potential perpetrators are less likely to utilize repression because they can anticipate the costs of condemnation. The threat of shaming—signaled by the extent of human rights monitoring—can deter abuse by capitalizing on the strategic considerations of potential transgressors. I develop a new global measure of human rights monitoring using quantitative text analysis. I show that monitoring strengthens human rights even when monitoring agents face institutional and political conditions adverse to their work. The efficacy of human rights advocates depends more on their ability to threaten condemnation than in carrying it out.