Did the Supreme Court strike down triple talaq on August 22, or not?

Well, according to some of the initial tweets and breaking news tickers on TV, the SC had “upheld” triple talaq, and not struck it down.

Yes, believe it or not, this was a La La Land Oscar fiasco all over again, with the media misreporting in the first two-three minutes that the Constitutional bench of the Supreme Court had upheld the practice. A number of news outlets tweeted that SC had suggested that Parliament be in charge of legislating, and that triple talaq was not violative of articles 14 and 14, those dealing with the fundamental right to equality.

SC has asked govt to bring legislation within 6 months. CJI Khehar said that all parties must decide keeping politics aside. #TripleTalaq — ANI (@ANI) August 22, 2017

CJI J S Khehar said that Talaq-e-biddat is not in violation of articles 14,15,21 and 25 of the constitution #TripleTalaq — ANI (@ANI) August 22, 2017

Now that was the minority view in a split 3:2 verdict that ruled out triple talaq. Media, in its urge to break the story, broke and twisted the covenant of adhering to facts while reporting. It reported CJI JS Khehar and Justice Nazeer’s views as the SC bench decision, when the exact opposite is true.

#Correction CJI Khehar upheld #TripleTalaq practice, asked Union Government to bring legislation in 6 months — ANI (@ANI) August 22, 2017

A number of journalists, even some at DailyO, rushed to condemn the SC for its “regressive” judgment. But the volte-face happened quickly, and the confusion gave rise to senior journalists “withdrawing” their previous tweets.

Confusing. Then why the temporary ban only for six months? What happens if Parliament doesnt legislate by then #TripleTalaq https://t.co/NAEIi5TE2d — barkha dutt (@BDUTT) August 22, 2017

Ok the media reporting on this SC verdict on #tripletalaq is woefully chaotic and incorrect. Withholding all comment till clarity. — barkha dutt (@BDUTT) August 22, 2017

With the number of contradictions in reporting, am withdrawing all my comments till full judgment on #TripleTalaq available https://t.co/hVq1E7kL2Z — barkha dutt (@BDUTT) August 22, 2017

Legal journals way more accurate than news outlets that were so embarrassingly contradictory today in reporting #TripleTalaq https://t.co/2lWjlTyqwk — barkha dutt (@BDUTT) August 22, 2017

No, that is minority judgement which passed the buck onto parliament.. #EndTripleTalaq https://t.co/zPMK9Kuu6I — Rajdeep Sardesai (@sardesairajdeep) August 22, 2017

Hurried corrections and revisions later, what did the media prove once again? That it only cares to put the story out first, not the truth. When speed overtakes the need to fact-check, the sorry state of journalism comes into fore.

We remember the media misreporting, or premature reporting, even during the coverage of the late former Tamil Nadu chief minister Jayalalithaa’s death. There were reports and tweets that the CM had died, even before Apollo hospital could confirm it.

Every time, the media misreports, the confusion on the ground creates a fertile site for more rumours, gossip and even violence. How is the traditional media supposed to take on the “fake news” army if its own standards are so shaky in the first place?

We must remember that media reporting isn’t and must never be a “war zone”, where split-second decisions have life and death consequences. The hunt for TRPs and clicks debases the media. Better to wait out for the full story looking at all sides than be in a hurry and err so unpardonably.

Also read: Calling it ‘unconstitutional’, Supreme Court strikes down triple talaq