The water car may no longer be running on the streets but the debate it has whipped up about the media and the dismal state of our education is proceeding full speed ahead.

Opinion writers, especially scientists have moaned and groaned about the lack of scientific knowledge and rationality among us.

And in the process television anchors who took a ride with the water wonder, Agha Waqar, have come under scrutiny also.

However, anchors themselves feel unfairly treated — pointing out that they neither were the first to flash this news and nor did they praise it without unnecessarily.

According to Talat Hussain who hosts a programme on Dawn News and did two programmes on Agha Waqar, the hype built up over weeks and it began with the Sindhi news media.

“We have to realize that Agha Waqar just did not barge into a studio. The build-up had been slow. Even before the parliamentary committee took it up, the news had been making the rounds. A campaign had been developing in the Sindhi news channels that the Urdu channels were not praising his work which is when we took it up,” he told Dawn in a telephonic conversation.

Hussain is right. Waqar was such a ‘hit’ on the regional channels that “walks” were organised to show solidarity with him in the smaller towns of Sindh.

Only later, did two of the leading anchors of Pakistan pick up the news and invite prominent scientists to comment on it.

Talat Hussain hence feels that had the first ones to report on this issue had done the due diligence, those in television who picked up the story later would have been better aware.

“If the print media had done its research, and rubbished it, then things would not have come this far. This guy had been holding the field for almost a month before the television crews went to him.”Hussain further adds: “There had been at least three meetings with members from the scientific community and the parliamentary committee. They inspected it. The unqualified endorsement by the government and scientific community led to the television shows.”

Another anchor feels that due diligence was done – scientists endorsed the car which is all that the media needed.

“When the country’s eminent scientists are not objecting to the authenticity of his claims, why should the media?” said Arshad Sharif of Dunya TV.

“My job as a journalist is to challenge his claims and his to satisfactorily answer all critique directed at him, and that was the angle that I took,” Sharif claimed.

Whether one agrees with what these two journalists say, their arguments and the other programmes that featured Waqar reveal more about the manner in which our media works than we realize.

Both Hamid Mir (who also did shows on the issue) and Mr Hussain did what most anchors do – allow a man to make claims and ensured that ‘other’ side was also given air time.

Let us not forget that in his first show on this water wonder, Hussain had invited Dr Attaur Rehman who kept protesting loudly throughout that this was a fraud. But his voice was just one among others; and because the talk show format prevents the host from weighing in on one side (after having done his due diligence) the louder side triumphed rather than the right one.

This is what journalism has been reduced. As long as the allegations or claims are made by someone, the person reporting them (or providing a platform in the shape of a talk show) bears little responsibility.

According to Owais Aslam Ali, who runs training workshops for journalists, “The media has present things in perspective. It’s job is not to bring two opposing sides together and let them sort it out. Waqar’s claims should have been picked up by his peers who would have vetted it before being picked up by the media.”

He further describes the reporting on the water car as being “muddied”.

The problem goes further than Waqar and his car.

Khawaja Asif appears on a talk show and hurls allegations against Shaukat Khanum Trust Hospital; Malik Riaz gives an interview and makes allegations against the chief justice and his son and earlier, many others appeared on one channel or another and accused former ambassador Husain Haqqani of having written a memo.

As long as they are making the allegations, it’s as if the media has no responsibility to bear.

This is the assumption on which Pakistani journalism works – based as it is on statement journalism primarily. Report the words of politicians and other well-known people and you are absolved of any responsibility and wrongdoing.

For Owais Aslam Ali of the Pakistan Press Foundation, “The regional and the national media need to verify the information that they are putting on air. They project events without verification, and the problem is largely structural.”

The print media is no different. Most of these allegations and scandals mentioned earlier made it to print but neither medium – ever – did any work to find out the facts.

Hence, we all may know that a certain federal minister lies through his teeth. But each statement of his is flashed – be it on the operation in Karachi or the on the situation in Balochistan. Rarely would a news report even bother pointing out that his previous statements had been proved wrong, leave alone pointing out the flaws in the latest one.

It is this approach that led to the water car hype.

The print media too published stories based on the press release from the standing committee that witnessed a demonstration.

As the press release never mentioned anything about the skepticism some of the scientists present, expressed, neither did the news stories.

A little investigation, a little effort to talk to people and get some expert opinion and perhaps the hype may have died down earlier.

As Adnan Rehmat, journalist and head of Intermedia, says, “Nothing should be taken at face value. In this case both the claimant’s words and the scientists verifying it were taken at as it is. That was completely unacceptable. Journalists were catering to the populist mentality… A car that runs on water was bound to get good ratings.”

In politics too, this effort can be helpful.

But with science and a car that runs on water, the claims of a scientist engineer and the media that projected him soon ran out of steam –unlike corruption allegations that continue to run amuck. This was more than evident in the follow up shows Mr Hussain and Hamid Mir did once there was a public outcry. The second time around, they provided the missing pieces of the puzzles.

Scientists were given the floor and they explained why the water car was not feasible. And because journalists had an objective, which was more than simply allowing people to talk, the result was more informative.

This is perhaps why follow-ups are prized the world over. Journalism may be the first draft of history but when given a chance we must at least write a second because it is far richer.