Opinion: Speculation isn’t Journalism

Since the moment the news broke that singer Whitney Houston had been found dead speculation has been rife.  People have been only too quick to point the finger and try and find someone to blame.

Less than an hour after her death was announced the question who is to blame? was already being asked and people were all too willing to give their theories.  Now we’re hearing claims that she went on a 48-hour drugs binge shortly before she died because sources -  so confident of what they are saying is true- say so and that's presuming the sources exist, of course.  How can anyone prove that it is true? Unless you can prove it, then you should not be writing it: It’s speculation not journalism.

We’ve also been treated to a variety of other rumours including the one dating from a while back which claimed that the singer had already died.  Her death on Saturday, the cause of which is still unknown, rather lays the previous rumours to rest doesn’t it?

The latest speculation is that Whitney was a secret lesbian and this is what led her down the path to self-destruction and onto her habit of drugs and drink, which to her credit she tried hard to fight and on the face of it had seemed to be turning her life around.  Addictions are far more complex than that and those are just repetitions of old rumours with little substance.

There was the same speculation surrounding Amy Winehouse’s death.  The Internet is still awash with speculation from news sources that she too had indulged in a drugs binge before she died, according to sources, only for the autopsy to find that there was no trace of illegal drugs in her system at the time of her death.  Since so many newspapers got that wrong you would think that they would tred a little more carefully before making unsubstantiated claims about Whitney Houston.
The Internet has led to a voracious appetite for gossip, speculation and untruths, and unfortunately there are too many people out there willing to believe almost everything they hear or read.  The other day, I heard somebody say that they knew some salacious celeb gossip was true “because they’d read it on the Internet” and of course, the people writing these stories on the Internet always tell the truth don’t they?  Are people really that naive?

Remember the Kate Middleton is pregnant story?  Most people could see through that one and even the most unreliable news sources in the UK didn't run with it and state it as fact.  Another rumour circulated that child actor Macaulay Culkin had died.  Recent pictures of him show that he doesn’t quite look his healthiest but he is still very much with us.  There are plenty of similar rumours about and I do wonder if some people feel a little bit silly once they realise that a story that they believed was untrue.  Does that not make them doubt the source of the story and does it not make them question some of the gossip that some websites tout?

Whitney Houston was somebody’s mother and somebody’s daughter.  There are many other people who have lost a close friend, a person that despite her personal demons, was loved and respected.  At what must be an excruciatingly difficult time for them wouldn’t it be good if ‘journalists’ concentrated on facts, not speculation?