Trial by media: evaluating the role of mainstream media and fact-checking agencies during the COVID-19 pandemic

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to critically assess the function of the media during the COVID-19 pandemic. It tries to understand how media corporations selectively polish a certain narrative against the other. It will also take into consideration the role of fact-checking agencies and its reliability in determining what is right and wrong. Design/methodology/approach This study uses qualitative methods and relies on secondary data available in academic domains. In this paper, a specific case related with the COVID-19 pandemic is taken up. Conflicting accounts of health professionals both in academic and industry are compared and analysed. Professional integrity of fact-checking agencies as well goes through scrutiny. Findings After conducting a critical analysis, it is observed that media houses have violated certain ethics while presenting news and opinions during the COVID-19 pandemic. Without any consideration of fair presentation, the mainstream media resorted to presenting vaccine hesitancy as conspiracy and deplatformed such voice from the media. This violates one’s freedom to free speech and expression. Research limitations/implications It is a viewpoint from the side of a free speech abolitionist. Practical implications Press will realize that it failed in a number of occasions to uphold and protect its ethical values. Originality/value A study questioning the role of media during the COVID-9 pandemic is rare. In this regard, adequate literature is always a difficulty considering the amount of censorship imposed by health agencies, academic institutions and the media. This particular study is built of limited yet reliable information made available by academicians and independent health professionals. As such, the value of work which focuses on the alternative perspectives is believed to add value to health professionals, policymakers, media professionals and the general population.