 |
| Good journalism required Pooja Tiwari her to probe further to dig out enough evidence and publish them in in public interest. |
May 4, 2016, NewsCrunch
The unfortunate death of a young Faridabad-based journalist of DNA, Pooja Tiwari, is turning out to be controversial.
She published a sting on a quack on April 1, who had claimed that many well-known doctors including a noted woman gynecologist were in collusion with him. Abortion and gender selection were among the specialist services he offered.
After the report was published, the woman gynecologist and her husband filed an FIR alleging that Pooja Tiwari had tried to extort Rs 2 lakh from them for not publishing the report.
After her death,the doctor couple have been booked for abetting suicide, on a complaint lodged by Pooja Tiwari's father.
The issue is sensitive and yet to get serious media attention.
The Hindustan Times noted that Pooja Tiwari was facing an extortion charge and had been drinking the evening she jumped to her death. At the time of her death, there were two male friends in her flat, a police inspector and a journalist, it noted.
The report, abrupt and without details, builds a damaging impression of of Pooja Tiwari.
Indian Express accessed an email written by Pooja Tiwari and reported that she was distraught that her name was being tarnished.
DNA placed Pooja Tiwari under suspension after the doctor couple made their charge. It chose not to report on her suicide but has kept the story link live suggesting it sees nothing wrong with what she published.
Newslaundry wrote a lengthy sympathetic piece asking to give Pooja Tiwari benefit of doubt till police and court completed their task. It also spoke about vulnerability of journalists and the obligation of newspaper managements to stand by them. DNA should explain its stance, it said.
It is for the police and the courts to go into the charges and counter-charges to establish the truth.
But in the interest of fair reporting it should be pointed out that the story filed by Pooja Tiwari was shoddy and made allegations without adequate proofs.
1) Pooja Tiwari writes that he quack mentions the name of the woman gynecologist. Good journalism required her to probe further to dig out enough evidence and publish them in in public interest. The word of a quack is not enough to cast aspersions.
2) Pooja Tiwari posted two videos of the sting operation. In these, the quack is not seen mentioning the woman gynecologist anywhere.
3) There are other loopholes. The quack says he works at the government-owned BK hospital and carries out quackery on the side. In one of the videos she speaks to the chief medical officer of BK hospital. Did she verify the quack's claim? There is no information on that.
Pooja Tiwari was young and inexperienced. What were her editors doing?