Down to the wire

Campaign journalism has its pitfalls

The retraction by The Wire of a string of reports on social media giant Meta, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, pending an internal investigation, raises a raft of issues concerning campaign journalism. Founded in 2015 by three senior and well-known journalists, The Wire website positioned itself on a “truth to power” platform, and it has rapidly become a beacon of gutsy journalism at a time when most media houses, including established groups, have succumbed to increasing repression of the press and personal freedoms without much pushback. But by its nature, however, campaign journalism of the kind that The Wire  practises runs the risk of being caught up in its own sense of righteousness. In these circumstances, journalistic rigour can be a casualty. This seems to have been the problem with the Meta stories.

The controversy began with a report alleging that Meta had extended to certain Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) officials — in this case, the party’s IT cell chief — the privilege of removing any post flagged by them without going through Meta’s own checking system through a program called XCheck. At least one error in the reporting was the nature of XCheck; it does not grant the power to take down posts but protects those accounts (usually held by celebrities) from the content takedown procedure that applies to ordinary users. But Meta officials also took to Twitter to describe the entire story as fabricated, prompting The Wire to publish a purported internal email in which Meta’s chief of communication is apparently berating his staff for the “leak” and demanding that the website’s reporters be put on a “watchlist”. Again, Meta claimed the email was fabricated.

Though Meta itself is scarcely known for its fidelity to ethics, the fact that one of Meta’s chief critics, a former senior staffer, also questioned the authenticity of the email should have given The Wire editors cause to opt for more circumspect fact checking. Instead, The Wire attempted to justify its reporting by rushing through with an incorrect follow-on story, worsened by the fact that at least one of the independent experts The Wire said it consulted denied being involved and the video it released turned out to be a trial site. It is worth noting that the eventual retraction of the Meta stories was not followed by an apology to The Wire’s readers. It remains to be seen if anyone on The Wire team will pay the price by resigning, which under the circumstances seems to be called for.

Given The Wire’s courageous reputation, a rarity in today’s media landscape, it is critical that the editors move quickly to re-establish its damaged credibility with a public commitment to editorial standards through a full accounting of why it tripped up this time, and explaining what editorial norms it follows. An organisation is often judged by how it deals with a mistake and on that test The Wire has failed. As a website that takes the high moral ground, following global best practice would be its best defence. On a larger canvas, an honest accounting will strengthen the cause of India’s dwindling non-partisan media as well.