As if the torrents unleashed by the real WikiLeaks were not overwhelming enough, it seems that now some clever souls are keen to use the opportunity to 'contribute' to the heady flow of information. – AFP (File Photo)

On Thursday, some Pakistani newspapers carried a news story which claimed there was sufficient proof of Indian involvement in Balochistan and Waziristan. Additionally, in an attempt to cater to a sense of security and superiority not uncommon among Pakistanis, it trivialised matters as serious as the attack in Mumbai in 2008 and resorted to caricaturing senior soldiers on the other side. The piece appeared to be based on a series of WikiLeaks cables that American missions had sent to Washington — only for its publishers to later realise that it may have been planted news. One newspaper group which carried the item has since sent a legal notice to the agency which originally ran the fake story. The group has accused the agency of filing suspect stuff in the past as well and warned that it may be constrained to not subscribe to it in future.

With the final responsibility of allowing it in print resting with the newspapers, we must question how, with such a history, the agency managed to make a splash with the story. The answer to this may lie in various tendencies we Pakistanis have perfected over time, and in our inability to come to terms with the emergence of multiple sources of information. Our idea of patriotism encourages us to promote causes even when the damage such promotion on our part can do to the country should make us extremely careful of what we report and how. Today it is one set of newspapers which has been misled into portraying ill-conceived propaganda as information; tomorrow it can be another. This is a warning for all those in the media. Sadly, the rush to provide information, and in this particular case an abundance of it, led to some of us losing the cherished balance — and scepticism — though hopefully momentarily.

The incident also illustrates how the more conventional media can falter easily in its quest for popular reporting as it strives to keep abreast of new competitors. In the case of the fake WikiLeaks cables that have now been condemned, the publishing of the news either coincided with, or was preceded by, its release on several websites. Not all these sites are known for their fairness, let alone objectivity. It will only be in the interest of the media to be a bit wary of the information suppliers that exist outside their pool of trustworthy sources.