First published in the Daily Maverick 168 weekly newspaper.

This “wait and see” is pertinent when trust in the government is so low in an era of corruption coupled with slow vaccine rollouts. But it’s now July, and there is still no verifiable evidence of “the Thembisa 10” born early in June, which would make the babies nearly a month old.

We have also been told by Piet Rampedi, the author of the story and editor of the Pretoria News who got the 10 babies “scoop” that went viral, that the Gauteng Department of Health (DoH) is involved in a “cover-up” of its “medical negligence”. Another major scoop.

The Gauteng DoH has since released a statement of its intention to take legal action against the editor and the media company, Independent Newspapers.

No matter what kind of story it is – column or opinion, investigative, reportage or advocacy – you have to be sure of your facts, which you check, and double-check before publishing. The best check for this particular story, as it entails counting the actual little beings, would be to see for yourself.

Apparently, “good news” is also a category of journalism. But even a good news story has to be factual.

For example, a fantastically good news story would be that Covid-19, with all its multiplying variants, was now over – but that would have to be based on fact. And right now, clearly this is more hopeful fantasy than fact.

Some of the facts about the “decuplets” story, so far, as it keeps moving:

Fact 1: The editor of the Pretoria News wrote a front-page story that a woman gave birth to 10 babies on 7 June. Several hospitals were mentioned in connection to the whereabouts of the babies. The sensational story went international. The birth was a world record and therefore would make it into the Guinness Book of Records, said the BBC, which also didn’t check but did what is referred to as “retweet journalism”.

Fact 2: After the public asked “Where are the babies?”, Rampedi wrote a statement on 22 June addressed to his colleagues at Independent Newspapers, apologising for how “the story was handled”. There was no apology to the public – that’s who journalists write for – nor to the rest of the media industry, which had all been tainted. He felt, since he was writing a “good news” story, that he didn’t need to do a full-on investigation.

Fact 3: Other national news organisations also reported the story, without holding back to follow through and check the facts. This saga has exposed a common problem in the new media ecosystem – “retweet journalism”. Whoever performed retweet journalism should also be retracting.

Fact 4: The editor of the Pretoria News said the government was covering up “medical negligence”. As pressure built up, we waited for the full and unreserved apology to come and then, just maybe, the Gauteng DoH would withdraw its threat to sue. Instead, we received the astonishing “I stand by my story. Ms Sithole was pregnant and gave birth to her 10 babies on June 7, 2021. It’s a fact.” Rampedi said he was being “pressured” through “orchestrated smear campaigns and abuse of state institutions”.

Fact 5: The Gauteng DoH released a statement on 23 June, announcing it would institute legal action against the editor and Independent Media over the “Thembisa10” story. A DoH spokesperson said the department wanted a retraction that there was an alleged cover-up by the provincial government, the premier, the MEC and the chief executive of Steve Biko Academic Hospital.

Fact 6: If this “legal action” goes ahead, it will set a nasty precedent for media freedom in SA. Although the DoH would have had recourse for its complaint through the Press Council, the Pretoria News belongs to Independent Newspapers, which withdrew from the council in 2016.

The Press Council has a system of retractions, corrections, apologies and appeals. A newspaper can, for example, be ordered to run a correction story that takes up the same amount of space as the offending, unfactual story.

The group, which owns the largest number of newspapers in SA, left the Press Council to set up its own internal ombud system. This means it handles its readers complaints itself, which raises the question: how unbiased is that?

Fact 7: In an analysis over the past 10 years of the Press Council’s rulings, the biggest erring has been the issue of the right to reply for subjects. This is closely tied to the problem with this story – verification of facts.

Fact 8: Unless you label it “fairy tale”, it doesn’t matter what kind of story it is – an investigation or a column about a personal event (for instance, investigative journalist Jacques Pauw’s astonishing comment/opinion piece about his experience at the Waterfront, under the influence of alcohol, which affected his memory of the actual events, it seems) – it has to be based on fact.

Fact 9: Newspapers in South Africa (and all over the world) are declining in circulations and have made staff redundant, especially senior subeditors, who were often responsible for fact-checking.

Ironically, last week, Oxford University’s Reuters Institute released a study on trust between readers and the media, which showed that trust in mainstream media was increasing – including in SA, which was up by four points.

Fact 10: We appear to be stuck in a “click culture”, in an age of information disorder where especially sensational stories drive traction. During the Covid-19 pandemic, this has helped feed problems such as vaccine hesitancy, for example.

The media, nor journalism, which is part of the media, is neither a monolithic whole nor an homogeneous entity. But the public doesn’t view it this way. One big disaster or mistake happens and the whole industry gets tainted.

This story is not disappearing because the editor is sticking to his “facts” and the DoH is intending to sue. So, we have to watch the space carefully. The whole baby scoop saga may end up setting a horrible precedent. DM168

This story first appeared in our weekly Daily Maverick 168 newspaper which is available for free to Pick n Pay Smart Shoppers at these Pick n Pay stores.