A historian who says it’s OK to speculate if you don’t have the facts
Dominic Fenech justifies speculation in the absence of facts
Exactly when did the historian Dominic Fenech become a media expert? (I know you’re reading this, Dominic, so I will appreciate an explanation of how a historian, whose stock-in-trade is facts, comes to sanction gossip and speculation.)
Dr Fenech has been, unusually, popping up regularly on the timesofmalta.com comments-board, beneath stories on the New Year’s Day murders, insisting that people should be free to speculate and comment even if those comments are hurtful to the grieving families. He has argued against those who, like me, call for circumspection in such an extraordinary situation.
Somebody at The Times noticed his stance on their comments-board and rang him up, so he’s quoted in an actual story today:
Historian Dominic Fenech says the media has a responsibility to report the story, especially because the original botched burglary theory seems to have been debunked.
“We don’t even know if the killer has been killed,” he says, adding that there are many questions left unanswered. “Ideally, we should stick to facts. But short of facts, it has to fall on speculation,” he says, adding that the police should issue regular bulletins.
Dr Fenech is being disingenuous here. Nobody doubts that the media have a duty to report the story. It’s the speculation that’s bothering us unduly. Never have I seen such extensive objection to this prying and attempts at tweezing out salacious details, creating them where none can be found.
Curiously, while there has been a shocking lack of empathy from those who are talking about this as though it is yet another episode of Eastenders in which the actors will wipe off their fake blood and go home to supper, there has also been a reassuring wave of revulsion at all the public gossip. Somewhere I read the telling comment that the way we are feeling is ‘what if it were me?’. That’s empathy.
The newspapers and sites which have turned themselves into Victorian scandal-sheets would do well to take account of the turn in public opinion. Those who keep track of such things – and they do – will know by now that I am a remarkably accurate bellwether for my kind, and if I can’t bring myself to write about the case except to ask everyone to please stop gossiping and speculating because you can feel the waves of pain even at this distance, then they should know that these sentiments are pretty representative of my readership.
“Ideally, we should stick to facts. But short of facts, it has to fall on speculation,” Dominic Fenech said. Indeed. Is that how he teaches history – by inviting his students to speculate in the absence of facts? Is that how he writes his research papers – by speculating when he doesn’t have sufficient facts to be getting on with?
I hope he had the good sense to read his own words this morning and freeze over with embarrassment at the fact – or it is speculation? – that he said them.
17 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
Dominic is a Professor.
He doesn’t like it when you call him Doctor.
Why?
There seems to be a certain determination from a part of society to nail this woman down.
If Dominic Fenech thinks this to be legitimate in the name of some social catharsis, he should ask what would have been the speculation were she among the dead.
What’s interesting is how he puts the responsibility for this baying for blood on the police.
If we were in another country, speculation about such crimes would be rife and out of control and nobody would bat an eyelid.
The issue with Malta’s size is that even when things happen to the “rich and famous”, it is rich and famous which somebody works for, has professional relationship with, or is friends with, and which to some extent some people can relate to, not some Kardashian family living in some exclusive postcode in LA, totally disconnected from the common Joe’s everyday life.
It is not because Maltese media is behaving different from any other media anywhere else in the world.
[Daphne – ‘Media’ are not an undifferentiated mass. What you are saying here is that in Malta we lack one essential component of the media: stations and newspapers that have a reputation for credibility. This is my point exactly: The Times was never, in the hierarchy of the press, the equivalent of the Daily Express. It should know that the standards and rules which govern the Daily Express do not also govern The Daily Telegraph.]
The decision of some family members to speak to the media is, in my view at least, regretful.
Some may see it as an attempt to control the agenda although one can’t possibly imagine the agony they are going through.
Even so, it is now increasingly more difficult to blame the public for discussing the case. Murders such as these can never be a ‘private’ matter.
The problem with Maltese newspapers on the issue is that through most of their reports and articles they seem to be acting with the same ethical criteria used by journalists from the Sun or OK magazine instead of The Times or the Guardian.
I didn’t expect anything better from Malta Today obviously, but other newspapers should stick to hard evidence.
It is not a matter reporting about the rich and famous and what not.
The Kardashians are different to the Xuereb family since the Kardashians live to be in the limelight while the others are a family of an entrepreneur. You don’t see Bill Gates having a reality show.
It all boils don to the fact that through the years certain newspapers have built their reputation by reporting the hard facts independently and in an unbiased manner and therefore their editors should not allow speculation and rumors to be printed, or sensationalist interviews like the one above for that matter with the sole intent to sell more papers
Should the media speculate about Dominic Fenech’s fetishes and sex life, given that he is a public person and there are no facts available?
Daphne, cannot agree with you more. But remember, there is a class in our society which would do anything to crush anyone who may have the remotest link to “GonziPN.”
That class in our society has been deprived of power to sow hate and disorder in other people’s everyday lives for so long, that they have to do it with another means, even if it means lieing and disseminating false statements.
The families of the victims should rest assured that the majority of the Maltese of good faith are on their side and will be with them to rebuild their lives. The future is there for them as well.
I find it VERY hard to believe Dominic Fenech said that. Lost in translation perhaps?
He did say exactly that. The comment is still there if you’d like to check for yourself.
With opinions like those of Professor Fenech, no wonder there is a lack of ethics by some journalists in the Maltese media.
Some printed papers are no more than cheap tabloids bent on speculation and the theory that “bad news sells” and in the absence of bad news, manufacturing some, helps.
The absence of police statements ahead of L-Orizzont can be explained very simply. The Police themselves have first to listen, understand and reach their own conclusions before informing the public with facts.
The comments on L-Orizzont have been denied by the person reported to have (from Rabat) reached the scene of the incident ‘before the police arrived from their station which is only five minutes away. This paper from (supposedly independent) GWU had to inject some indirect political flavour even at a time of tragedy which hit two families.
Yet, Professor Fenech prefers this type of reporting to prudent, responsible and factual presentation of events.
Similar to Malta Today’s approach, The Times avoids mentioning your name as much as possible.
They only mention you when there is a report on a court case.
Today, they referred to Josanne Cassar as a blogger, for goodness sake. I wonder if anyone reads her blogs. She aims to promote her blog as frequently as possible on Facebook, apparently to no avail.
I always read this blog first everyday, before surfing timesofmalta.com.
I am not following the case and haven’t read in full what Professor Fenech has said, but it is unfair of you to judge Professor Fenech’s academic record on one single comment.
I am sure that Professor’s Fenech academic track-record speaks for itself and being an ex-student of his, I can only give praise to his academic abilities.
This comment on http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20120106/local/Victims-silent-.401202 probably sums up the thoughts of many others:
“J Degabriele
Today, 11:10
“I feel this is the time to allow the police to conduct their investigations unhindered,” says Mr. Xuereb. And he is right. So he shouldn’t give any interviews either describing events to which he was not a witness!”
Historians speculate not only in the absence of facts but even in the presence of facts.
Facts do not usually speak for themselves.
They have to be organised, sometimes discarded if they are or appear irrelevant, explained and a narrative is then weaved together.
That is why historians come to very different conclusions. Historians do not spoon feed readers but also help them reach their own conclusions.
Having said this, it seems quite premature to speculate on the tragedy of Sliema. What appeared an open and shut case is now looking less so.
I am glad, Daphne, that over time you have grown to appreciate basing opinions on facts rather than speculation.
May Balzan, Vella and others of the same ilk join this Club of Enlightened Journalists.
May they stop wreaking havoc in other people’s lives.
[Daphne – I have always based my opinions on facts.]
Not really. But let’s not quarrel.
At this moment, it’s best to focus our attention on the damage these Wise Guys of the Printed Word are causing to the profession they claim to belong to.