There is a profusion of questions surrounding the death of Janashakthi Insurance PLC Director Dinesh Schaffter, which is perhaps the most controversial high-profile case reported during the past few months, where several parties are conducting investigations into the incident.

Schaffter's death has attracted public attention, and the media plays a key role in it. However, recently, the Police criticised media reports that suggested that Schaffter’s death was a suicide and that former cricket commentator Brian Thomas or a family member had been named suspects. It added that the relevant investigation teams of the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) have not made such statements or reached any conclusions regarding Schaffter’s death.

As the Police pointed out, since the beginning of this case, perhaps due to its controversial nature, media reports about it included and to a certain extent highlighted rumours surrounding Schaffter’s death. While some of these rumours, or conspiracy theories, pertained to the cause of Schaffter’s death, some of them were about his alleged murderer. At the same time, many media institutions did not hesitate to report certain speculations on the reasons for Schaffter’s alleged murder or suicide.

However, while media institutions were fulfilling their main duty of reporting, the fact that media reports included a considerable amount of rumours and speculation was questionable. This is mainly because Schaffter’s death is still being investigated. It goes without saying that in a context where the public’s support could play an instrumental role in the investigations into Schaffter’s death, the publicising of rumours and speculations has the potential to change public perception about the case. That in turn has an impact on the manner in which the public supports these investigations. At the same time, the publicising of such rumours or speculations could be advantageous to the perpetrators, if Schaffter’s death was indeed a murder.

In cases such as these, media institutions play an extremely important and responsible role. On the one hand, they have a duty to keep the public informed about new developments, and on the other hand, they have a duty to be responsible in their reporting when it comes to cases that are still being investigated. Balancing these two aspects is a duty media institutions have to fulfill, and in order to do so, their reporting should be accurate, factual, and constructive; and should not include uncorroborated information, rumours, or speculation. Similar concerns about responsible reporting were raised with regard to the alleged increase in drug use and crystal methamphetamine (Ice) use among schoolchildren, and the negative impacts of media reports with rumours and speculation were pointed out by many parties.

Media institutions’ freedom of expression and publication should be respected. However, if media reports, especially those with unverified information, have the potential to obstruct or slow down investigations into Schaffter’s death, this is a matter that deserves attention. It would be greatly beneficial to the public and the reputation of media institutions if the latter paid attention to their reporting style with a focus on making news constructive and fact-based. Entertaining the public should not be a priority when it comes to reporting news.