Corruption allegations have increased in the media which has been targeting specific officials. The government increased its criticism of the media, using the term 'personality assassination' to describe unprofessional media practices that attack people. King Abdullah II used the term in a  letter to the Prime Minister during a recent press conference which talked about the resignation of a minister due to corruption accusations.

'Personality assassinations,' according to Al-Ghadd journalist Samih Maayta, means to "accuse or charge someone of corruption or to mention someone's name in a corruption case when he is innocent. This is done either deliberately, for journalistic or political motives, or accidently, by mentioning an official's name during the preliminary stages of the case because of the position they hold as a senior official in a department that is involved, although these officials are not in any way involved in the case."

Maayta believes that the media is capable of reporting corruption cases without implicating the names of high profile figures that do not have any relation to the case.

In order to achieve this, "we must find a way in order to not defame institutions or figures with no material evidence, while on the other hand we must not be silent in the face of corruption by protecting corrupt figures. There must be a way to report on these cases without naming officials that are not suspected in the corruption charges. There is a clear difference between both methods and it is evidence and truth that should be the main criteria," Maayta told Eye on the Media.

He also pointed out that, "much of what is said in the council does not need to be mentioned by the media. The media's job should be to uncover stories in their entirety and publish the truth or submit them to the courts to be reviewed. This way, 'personality assassination' is avoided and corrupted people are not protected."

Samih added, "we should depend on courts to rule over such cases instead of spreading it in media first. Once the court condemns a person, we can say he is a corrupt. We do not want to protect corrupt people or harm others."

Generalizing, according to Maayta, benefits the corrupt, "When we say that both the public and private sector are corrupted, we no longer can tell the difference between those that are really corrupt and those that are innocent within these sectors. The truth only comes from collecting evidence."

He went on to say that information and transparency help to stop the spread of rumors, "Truth is the solution to all issues because it does not leave room for assumption. We must allow investigations to run their course before we publicize information."

Maayta said that journalists are similar to policemen. "Before publishing a report there is an investigation and evidence is collected. However, what is happening in the media today is different. You might find a headline that talks about corruption within a certain institution, yet within the article you will not find any evidence of corruption. Just from reading the title, readers are left with the impression that there is corruption."

'Personality Assassination' result of an absence of transparency

The director and editor of khabarjo.net, Alaa Fazaa, believes that, "the real reason for 'personality assassination' is not the fault of journalists but instead is due to a lack of government transparency when dealing with corruption cases. If there was transparency, journalists wouldn't use unconfirmed information."

"If the media committed a mistake and 'personally assassinated' an official, then the court can right this wrong and give the person the reputation they deserve back," Fazaa told Eye on the Media.

Fazaa questioned, "What prevents individuals whose 'personalities were assassinated' from revealing the documents that can prove their innocence? Few are those who take advantage of this right. Public figures should accept criticism openly since they are holding public positions, and although violations may occur, it is their responsibility to bear them."

Alaa, who is facing a lawsuit by the Public Security Director Hussein Majali for three news websites, including Khabarjo, over libel and slander charges, said, "We tackled the truth, which is a journalist's job according to press and publication law. Journalists cannot always find the truth, they are not a judicial or investigative institute. We searched for the truth and ended up getting information from crossed resources. The courtroom will have the final say."

He also emphasized that it is better to provide information that is supported with evidence, but in the event that there isn't any, we must depend on crossed resources. Using crossed resources means getting the same information from more than one reliable source and point of view.

Alaa's website published the statements of 36 individuals who accused Queen Rania of corruption. The accusations were continuous personal attacks that were made with no proof or evidence. He argues that each statement should be treated separately, "Those who issued the statements should be held responsible for the content, however it is the media that will appear before the court because it is responsible for conveying the message. This makes the decision complicated because it depends on the editor's belief in the credibility of his sources. If he finds them true he can publish them and if he doesn't find them completely accurate, then he can still mention the story and highlight the main points, while omitting the points of contention."

"A decision like this becomes very complicated in light of the huge problem we have-lack of evidence. We barely find one documented news story out of the 50 to 60 that are published. This is not our fault. It is the government that established the law on accessing information," Fazaa added.

The media varies between preferring to publish the news quickly at the expense of accuracy.

"Waiting for confirmation mean losing the story," according to Fazaa. "Over a year and a half ago I published an article and once it was released it was criticized for having exaggerations and for not being documented. However, a couple of months ago the National Dialogue Committee was given the documents that proved the validity of the article. I didn't have the proper documentation at the time, and I had to rely on crossed resources and different points of view."

The Director of the news website believes that withdrawing the statement from the websites will not affect the credibility of the news or the website, but will give the impression that the freedom of the media in Jordan is under pressure.