On 17 March 2015, during a parliamentary session to debate an interpellation submitted by Deputy Mahmoud Kharabsheh in relation to measures to manage the Jordanian nuclear project, the deputy dropped a bombshell when he said that Dr. Khaled Toukan, chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, had offered him jobs for 25 persons from the Kharabsheh tribe in return for dropping the interpellation.

The deputy, who previously submitted an interpellation about the same project in May 2013, appeared in a video of the session carried by some websites, in which he says that Toukan came to him after his first interpellation and told him: "Come on, man! Why do you care about this? Bring 20 (or) 25 members of the Kharabsheh family, and whatever you want will happen." (Minute 18:40)

This was not the only accusation made by the deputy against the chairman of the commission. He had also accused him of appointing an expert as a consultant at the commission as a "price" for a testimony that the latter had given, in which he commended the measures adopted by the commission in relation to the nuclear project. The chairman of the commission used this testimony, as the deputy says, to support the case for the nuclear project. The deputy described all of this as "a case of bribes, deviation, and corruption." He said that the chairman of the commission was running it as an "estate."

After the session, media outlets provided extensive coverage of the accusations of the deputy, which he repeated in a seminar held by the Jordan Transparency Center on 21 March. Some of the headlines that appeared in the media read as follows: "Kharabsheh: Khaled Toukan Misleading Deputies…He Offered Me Appointing 25 Members of My Tribe in Return for My Silence," "Deputy Mahmoud Kharabsheh: Toukan Offered Me a Bribe," "Deputy Kharabsheh Shoots His Arrows at Toukan and Accuses Him of Offering Him a Bribe," "Kharabsheh Hits Toukan Below the Belt in Strongest Parliamentary Interpellation So Far," and "Kharabsheh Accuses Chairman of Energy Commission of Tempting Him With Jobs."

In all this coverage, media outlets did not carry any reply by the chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission to the accusations. Nor did any media outlet say that it had tried to obtain a reply from him. On 22 March 2015, Roya TV devoted an episode of its talk show "Nabd al-Balad" to the nuclear project, during which it held a telephone call with Toukan, who described Kharabsheh"s accusation as "false." He said that he did not reply to the accusations during the session at the time because he only wanted to reply to "technical matters" and did not want to "go into personal matters." He added that he reserves his legal right to prosecute the deputy. However, the deputy insisted on his statement and reiterated it in a telephone call in the same episode.

Although each party stuck to its position, the media, immediately after the episode, refrained from discussing this issue despite its seriousness. Thus, the media failed to do any follow-up and to present to the public any decisive position on accusations, which are simply either true or false. In either case, there are legal measures that should be taken: Either against the person who made the accusations if they are proven to be false or against the person who committed violations if they are proven to be true. More than a year has passed without any media outlet reporting even if any party had launched an investigation.

Media Promoting Accusations Without Follow-Up

The above case is not an exception in the performance of media outlets, especially electronic sites. Over the past year, there have been many other examples of similar cases in which media outlets allowed themselves to be used as a platform for leveling accusations, without bothering to follow up on them.

In March 2015, a news website published a report headlined "Minister of (Social) Development Turns Blind Eye to Suspicions of Corruption at Society Chaired by Former Deputy." The report stated that deputies and persons interested in public action had complained to Reem Abu Hassan, minister of social development, about "irregularities" at the Hajj Affairs Society in the city of Rusaifa, which, according to the report, is chaired by a former deputy. The report says that these irregularities refer to the society "encroaching on state land and using 19 donums (a donum is a land measure estimated at less than one acre) by renting the land and benefiting from it with the knowledge of the minister and the director of social development in Rusaifa, who addressed the ministry previously, along with a group of deputies from Rusaifa, but the minister did not lift a finger."

The previous report did not include any clear facts that support the accusation. Also, no reply was sought from the minister of social development, who was accused personally of "turning a blind eye to suspicions of corruption." This accusation was raised for one day only on one news site. More than a year has passed since then. The website has not raised the issue again. No other media outlet has reported it.

On the parliamentary level, a news site reported a statement in November 2015 by Deputy Saleem Batainah, in which he said that the agreement to computerize health data at health institutions in the Kingdom, known as Hakeem, concluded by the Ministry of Health with a specialized company "started with corruption and will end up in corruption." The previous report quoted the deputy as asserting that he had "documents."

However, neither this site nor other outlets followed up on the previous accusation. No one inquired from the deputy about the nature of the corruption that he had observed or his later measures in this regard. Almost 10 days later, one site only published an article by Dr. Omar Assoufi, in which he commented on the silence of the deputy after making the accusation. He said that the deputy himself had raised the issue of this agreement in the middle of 2014 and then "disappeared." Addressing the deputy, the writer commented: "It seems that you bring up the issue whenever you have a disagreement with the government or you want something from it."

In January 2016, Deputy Nidal Hiyari appeared in a video clip on YouTube in a parliament session (minute 12:57) raising a paper bag that has the logo of "Lafarge" cement company and saying, while pointing to the bag, that "Lafarge…has brought agenda books to the deputies and some colleagues just to ignore the 1,880 donums."

The rest of the deputy"s speech was lost in the hullabaloo that occurred afterwards by deputies who raised their voices to protest against what he said. So what he said was indistinct. However, news sites provided ample coverage on the same day of a report, in which they quoted the deputy as accusing the company of "bribing deputies" and distributing gifts "so as to ignore what he described as corruption files involving it." The deputy was also quoted as saying that the company wants to "cover up the corruption it carries out in its projects and land," and that it "offers gifts to the deputies to let a land case pertaining to it pass."

The media only carried these accusations on the same day when the session was held, but remained silent on them afterwards. Thus, the story ended on the same day when the deputy apologized to fellow deputies and said that he had only intended to caution that company gifts are "a bid by it to win over the deputies to serve its interests," but that he did not mean that they could indeed be influenced.

In the meantime, no media outlet investigated the nature of the "corruption" that the deputy spoke about or the facts on which he based his accusation. No one informed the public about what he meant by the "1,880 donums" that he referred to. No one investigated whether the deputy took any legal action after the session in relation to a case, which was clear-cut.

In February 2016, two electronic sites quoted Deputy Fawwaz Zoubi as saying that a company set up by the government to develop land of the Mafraq Development Zone "had entered into suspicious partnerships through undeclared agreements over the span of four years," and that this company "had wasted millions of dinars for the people of Mafraq and for the treasury." He added that the Social Security Corporation Fund adopted a decision three years ago "to increase the capital of the company to make up for the losses that it had incurred because of mismanagement, worth 25 million dinars borne by the Jordanian people." The deputy was also quoted as saying that "the development companies set up recently only aimed at facilitating bribes and corruption cases and facilitating concluding suspicious deals under the table."

The previous accusations were published for one day. The two sites that published them did not raise the issue again and only reported the accusations as the deputy made them. There was no investigation of what he meant by "suspicious partnerships" and "undeclared agreements." Nor was there an investigation of which other development companies facilitated the payment of bribes and concluded suspicious deals, as he said, or the types of these deals and the parties with which they were concluded. Besides, there was no investigation of the position of the Social Security Corporation as the deputy"s statement suggested that it had played a role in "covering up" losses caused by mismanagement.

In March 2016, the same deputy made another accusation of corruption against a former minister of finance, whom he did not name. The media provided extensive coverage of his statement, in a parliamentary intervention, that this minister "committed a crime against the country and used to give grants to whomever he wanted" and that he had recommended that one of the deputies (he did not name him) receive exemption worth 90,000 dinars.

According to the coverage, the discussion of the deputy"s accusations against the minister of finance was adjourned because the current minister of finance was absent from the session. Meanwhile, Deputy Muflih Ruhaimi requested the formation of an inquiry committee to investigate these accusations. However, no one later told the public whether the Lower House of Parliament had formed an inquiry committee and whether the current minister of finance had replied to the deputy"s accusations.

In April 2016, some news sites quoted Deputy Zakaria Sheikh as saying, during a parliamentary intervention, that there were "major corruption issues at the Higher Council for Affairs of Persons With Disabilities." The report cites Sheikh as "accusing top leaders of the Higher Council for Affairs of Persons With Disabilities of corruption, describing them as influential persons." The report adds that Sheikh demanded "that corrupt persons be held accountable."

News sites carried the report in almost the same wording, which was brief and general in nature, while lacking any clear facts. Despite the seriousness of the accusations, the media did not follow up on them and did not seek any reply to them by concerned agencies, led by the Higher Council for Affairs of Persons With Disabilities whose leaders were directly accused of corruption.

In the same month, an electronic site quoted Deputy Hayil Wad"an Daajah as accusing "deputies" whom he did not name of "reaching the Lower House of Parliament by dirty money." The report, which was very brief, did not quote the deputy as providing very specific information about this serious accusation. Also, neither this site nor any other media outlet raised the subject again.

Media Normalizing Public Attitude Toward Manifestations of Irregularity

The above are just examples. Anyone who investigates will find many more accusations of committing serious violations made by some parties against other parties. The media were satisfied with serving as a platform for launching these accusations without playing their role in following up on them and investigating the facts related to them. Of course, here, it is not a matter of the immunity of the deputy and his right to expression under the dome. In this report, we address the duty of the media to follow up on what is raised, especially since they do not hesitate to publish what was said verbatim.

The media do not go to those who make these accusations and ask them about the facts on which their accusations are based. These are mostly brief, general, and lack specific information. Also, the media do not go to the parties against whom these accusations are made to investigate their reply to them. Nor do the media go to official control agencies to ask them about their legal actions concerning public accusations of corruption against official personalities or institutions.

Besides, the media do not engage in any follow-up. Regardless of the seriousness of the accusations, they are satisfied with being a theater for the circulation of these accusations for a period of several days, at best. Then, the media remain completely silent on them, exactly as those who launched them remain silent.

Extremely serious accusations, like the ones mentioned in the previous examples, topple officials, and perhaps governments, in other countries. No media outlets, which have the minimum respect for their public, can let such accusations pass without deciding on their validity. However, the local media deal with them simply as "sensational" news that attracts readers, just like violent traffic accidents, bizarre crimes, sudden weather changes, or "amusing" statements by the prime minister or other news that usually makes headlines on news sites for a day or two. This news makes people busy by reacting to it in the comments section and on social media sites, but it eventually goes down to the bottom of the screen to be replaced by other "sensational" news.

In this type of coverage, the flaw in the performance of the media exceeds the fact that they have failed to undertake their role, whose essence is investigating facts and relaying them to the public. The flaw here turns into "normalizing" the attitude of the public toward corruption news. The media do this by placing this news in one basket with other news and then letting it go without raising any kind of ongoing public debate, exactly as they do with all other news.