Last Sunday we woke up to yet more allegations of questionable conduct by the administrators of a local NGO. The front page story of a Sunday newspaper blared out that ‘Reports of Malpractice at Rainbow Ward Under Investigation’. What followed appeared to be a damning indictment of the previously unsullied record of the Puttinu Cares cancer charity. The article was based on claims made by the parents of a young cancer patient Kyle Cutajar.
One of the main objectives of good journalism is to present as accurate and comprehensive a picture of events as possible
In a statement confirmed on oath, the child’s parents made some very grave allegations. They actually alleged that their son’s life was at risk because of the clinical malpractice and improper behaviour of those nurses working at the Rainbow Ward who were also committee members of Puttinu Cares. I don’t know about you, but I find those kind of charges to be deeply shocking. The very idea of nurses putting the lives of their young patients at risk is chilling. I read on to see how exactly how this had been allowed to happen as claimed.
Kyle had contracted leukaemia and had started receiving treatment at the Rainbow Ward since last summer. It is foreseen that he will require a further three years of treatment in order to recover. Certain nurses who are committee members of the Puttinu Cares NGO also work at the Rainbow Ward.
There seems to have been some bad blood between Kyle’s parents and these nurses when some of the latter dissuaded the parents from fund-raising on their own behalf. Following that incident, it is alleged that some of the nurses turned against Kyle, occasionally shouted at him and administered medicine when it was not required.
His parents were mostly upset at the fact that other children in the ward did not play with Kyle – behaviour which they attributed to other parents having turned their children against him. The article was padded out with claims by former nurses – who chose not to be named – confirming some aspects of the claims made by Kyle’s parents. And that was that.
I scoured the article a couple of times to see what reaction had been forthcoming from the nurses or from the representatives of Puttinu Cares. I found none. There did not appear to have been any attempt by the journalists covering the story to contact the medical professionals accused of criminal misconduct to hear their side of the story.
I can’t even begin to describe how unethical such an omission is. One of the main objectives of good journalism is to present as accurate and comprehensive a picture of events as possible. In order to do this, it’s essential to try and obtain all pertinent information about events or incidents.
In this case, the version of the nurses and Puttinu Cares officers accused of malpractice is very pertinent for a comprehensive account of the whole affair. Simply relaying accusations or claims doesn’t make for informative or ethical journalism, and can lead to distortions of the truth and irreparable harm to the reputation of people and institutions.
In this case, the only claims that were reported were those of the parents and the anonymous former colleagues of the nurses accused of malpractice. Now their allegations may or may not be founded and there is no way I am condoning that their claims be ignored or stifled. However, it is only fair that the people they are charging with such grave misconduct be given a chance to present their version of events and to explain their behaviour.
As it is, Puttinu Cares was not given equal billing in the original article. In the absence of its version of events, some readers may have been disillusioned enough to tar this NGO with the same brush as other, less credible and less transparent organisations.
When the chairman of the Puttinu Cares foundation, the oncologist Victor Calvagna, issued a press release refuting the claims and explaining the context of the situation, a clearer picture emerged, because – to quote the Book of Proverbs, “The first one to plead his cause seems right, until his neighbour comes and examines him.” However the original article, which was posted online and was turning up in online searches about Puttinu Cares, was not updated with Dr Calvagna’s statement, so compounding the first breach of journalistic ethics.
Despite the growing power of social media, the traditional media still has the power to define debate and to shape how readers perceive issues. Selective reporting and omitting key facts or versions of events can shatter the trust people have in an organisation.
That’s why anybody involved in the journalistic process has a huge responsibility to be as faithful as possible to the truth, and that means conveying the big picture. Anything less is a disservice to readers and to the ideal of factual reporting.
cl.bon@nextgen.net.mt