Corruption is not exposed by rumors; it requires evidence.
These days, the media’s battle with petrochemical managers has entered a new phase, but a harsh reality cannot be ignored: a media outlet without evidence is empty-handed in the fight against corruption.
In one of the cases, the oil desk manager has been convicted. Regardless of the legal details of the case, this event should be a serious warning for all media and journalists: hearsay, probabilities, and unverified information are not evidence of corruption.
If we are to fight real corruption, favoritism, and violations, the path is not through spreading rumors and guesses; the path is through evidence, documents, contracts, transactions, official letters, and information that can be stood by.
For more than a year and a half, I have been writing about claims of war financing by some trustees and also about funds that, according to available information, have been withdrawn and whose return is said to be debatable. The articles are available. Today, when Azari Jahromi, the former minister, mentions this issue, the question arises again as to why some topics are suddenly taken seriously when brought up by a former official.
Regarding the departure of some officials’ children and families from the country during the war, if I wrote about anything, it was based on flight information, not hearsay and what they say.
This is exactly the issue.
The media is not supposed to be a loudspeaker for rumors; it is supposed to put evidence on the table.
If domestic media also had solid evidence, verifiable information, and presentable documents for their content, many cases that today lead to the conviction of media and journalists would take a completely different shape.
A real fight against corruption does not start with sensational headlines; it starts with evidence and must also end with evidence.
And if someone truly claims to fight corruption, there is a simple question.
Hamid Hajipour, the owner of this media, should be asked: where is your evidence?