Jacques Pauw: Daily Maverick's ethics in question

Daily Maverick issued an apology and retraction following investigative journalist and author Jacques Pauw's piece about his altercation and arrest at V&A Waterfront. Pauw's article appeared on DM on February 12. 

This week Pauw apologised to all concerned. He said he had had "too much to drink" and apparently couldn't remember what had happened. DM fired him. Trying to deflect blame, editor Branko Brkic said the episode called the media's ethics into question.

DM had no reason to doubt this first-person account from a prominent if not famous writer. However, it doesn't offers the same courtesy to John Public - it doesn't publish letters to the editor and right of reply as I've found from personal experience. There's a different standard for the media and its members.

But Pauw's Sturm und Drang piece is another story. His previously good reputation and hazy drunkenness aside, this was poor editorial by DM, a situation I've noted of them (and South African media). One time its business writer Sasha Planting, in a fact-lite and disingenuous attack on a Sygnia CEO Magda Wierzycka, wrote auditors don't consider a company's going concern. Going concern is of the utmost importance. I wrote to managing editor Janet Heard noting Planting's error with reference to sections of the International Auditing Standards. The article wasn't corrected.

Because of the serious nature of Pauw's allegations and that he was arrested, DM ought to have independently verified and fact-checked them. Apparently they did but published the story when they didn't get a response from V&A management and police. 

Jeremy Gordin writes in Politicsweb that DM obviously thought there was something off about Pauw's version. He said there was no hurry to publish, so why didn't they establish the facts first. He also asks why they've not been criticised for their role in this.

As an op-ed and humble letter to the editor writer (not DM, though) I was contacted by papers to confirm, with evidence if I had, when I made startling allegations. Other times it wasn't published. I guess for the self-styled conscience of the nation DM there's no need.

Nevermind Pauw's dread at his fuck-up, what about editors Brkic's and Heard's.

"I had too much to drink in the restaurant." That old excuse. If this condition, which is too common in SA and cause of crowded trauma units, isn't a good reason for the alcohol ban then I don't know what is.