New Delhi

I never thought there would come a day when I would have to create a classification of various types of falsehoods in shades of grey, though it stands to reason now. A rumour is not a lie, a claim is not a fact and allegation is not quite a verdict. And, as it turns out, there is propaganda, there is fake news and there is wilful disinformation done with dubious intent.

Advertisment

The outrage this weekend in India over Poonam Pandey, a small-time celebrity known for reality TV acts, glamorously exposing photoshoots and outlandish claims, is understandable because she has crossed a red line in public relations and attention-seeking. In the process, she has even turned the rules of journalism upside down in the eyes of a section of the public. That needs some cleaning up now.

Ms Pandey has faked her own death to ostensibly raise public awareness about cervical cancer. Coincidentally, the news came on the day India's finance minister Nirmala Sitharaman announced a government initiative to boost cervical cancer vaccines among Indian women. That kind of makes it all curiouser.

Netizens are understandably outraged because of Ms Pandey's insensitivity in making a gimmick out of a disease that often causes trauma to its victims and their loved ones. 

Advertisment

Journalists and news-watchers, including myself, are not amused either.

The problem here is that journalists are being accused of not checking facts in running with the false story of her faked death. I do not quite think so. Time was when everything in print was considered sacred. We seem to have now reached a point of cynical perception where reporters are expected to check with a dead person before running an obituary. 

How exactly does a journalist handle such a situation? The well-accepted rule is that if the source is official or credible and is named or identified, you can break the news. In this instance, Ms. Pandey's manager officially confirmed the news of her death, making established news organisations run with the story, although some were smart enough not to run it — and it helps that she is not such a famous celebrity as to have caused a big story miss.

Advertisment

Ms. Pandey shot to dubious fame in 2011 when she offered to strip naked if India's cricket team won the World Cup. Team India did win the World Cup but Ms Pandey chose not to follow her words. But she subsequently revealed enough body to stay on as a digital-age micro-celebrity.This week's outrage was outrageous even by her own standards of attention-seeking.

I would classify her act (presumably backed by a pharma company or NGO linked to cancer awareness) as one of wilful disinformation. That is a serious attempt to mislead journalists and news organisations and the general public. I urged in a tweet that this should meet with retaliation of sorts. You cannot invoke the law in every act of public misconduct, but you can match moves on the chessboard. As for her dubiously noble intent, the jury is out.

Worldwide, there is a regulatory understanding that there should be truth in advertising. However, between loud politics and digital marketing, there are many grey areas in which voters and consumers are misled.

We live in a world where even Pulitzer-prize-winning stories by newspapers like The Washington Post and The New York Times have proved to be misleading or false. No one is perfect in this game.  But we do need processes that ensure checks and balances. With social media platforms becoming the quick generators and purveyors of news, the whole game is becoming complicated. Artificial intelligence is only going to make it worse.

As it turns out, Ms. Pandey's shenanigan, with a commercial goal packaged inside a noble intent, needs to be policed by the public relations and marketing industry watchdogs or regulatory bodies, if they exist at all. Strangely enough, I am not even sure if this falls inside the purview of the Advertising Standards Council of India.

Also read | Poonam Pandey goes LIVE after death stunt, says 'I'm feeling terrible'

While we can congratulate journalists who did not run with the story, it must be remembered that reporters cannot wait for elaborate details to break a news story if there is a reasonable source confirming it on record. The onus of responsibility must then shift to the source.

In a world in which the biggest of democracies, India and the US, are in the news for misinformation by political parties and business organisations, Ms. Pandey's misadventure may be of minor importance. But it gives a wake-up call to draw and redraw red lines and proclaim them loud for digital age hygiene. PR professionals and digital marketers need to brainstorm this as much as journalists.

Also read | Kangana Ranaut mourns after Poonam Pandey's reported death, says 'this is so sad..'

As for journalists, I recommend careful use of language. You can always report a piece of news but context it in a manner that screams disbelief. The wisdom of hindsight. Oh, well!

(Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)