WhatsApp Groups with Journalists and Their Sources Must End

By Esther Nakkazi

As we commemorate this year’s World Press Freedom Day, I feel compelled to voice a growing concern: the practice of journalists and their sources mingling in WhatsApp groups must come to an end.

In today’s digital age, WhatsApp groups spring to life after every event or cause, serving as platforms to exchange information, debate issues, network, or even fundraise. Some of these groups are fleeting and purposeful, vanishing as quickly as they form. A personal favorite of mine is the baby shower WhatsApp group—an ephemeral gathering where we joyfully deliberate on the baby’s gender, plan surprise gifts, and, on the big day, revel in the mother’s delight. Once the celebration ends, the group dissolves, leaving only fond memories in its wake.

But while such groups create moments of camaraderie, the dynamic changes when it comes to journalists and their sources. Here, the ethical waters grow murky.

The rise of WhatsApp has revolutionized communication, offering a platform for vibrant discussions, feedback, and increased visibility for stories. Yet, the idea of journalists and their sources sharing such intimate digital spaces feels fundamentally wrong. Journalism, at its core, demands a certain professional detachment. This boundary, once sacrosanct, is now blurred as savvy public relations officers and communication teams infiltrate these spaces, often weaponizing them to push their agendas.

It’s not uncommon to see WhatsApp groups become pipelines for press releases, voice notes, or curated updates. By the day’s end, radio stations across the country echo the same quotes, like a chorus singing in perfect, rehearsed harmony. What’s worse, the discussions often meander beyond news, spilling into casual gossip, unsolicited flattery, and trivial updates—a far cry from the dignified exchange of ideas that journalism demands.

Defenders of these groups argue that they’re akin to virtual press conferences, offering a modern avenue for journalists and sources to stay connected in the fast-paced news cycle. But in practice, these groups often devolve into spaces where journalists are pressured, manipulated, and cajoled into submission.

I’ve been part of WhatsApp groups where conversations veered into deeply personal or uncomfortable territory. PR officers have openly chastised journalists for stories deemed unfavorable, urging retractions or apologies under the guise of job security concerns or placating “angry bosses.” The group dynamic amplifies this coercion, making it harder for individual journalists to push back against such manipulation.

A personal message to a source? That’s one thing. But a WhatsApp group where journalists and sources collude to craft narratives, pander to egos, and sanitize coverage? That’s an affront to the principles of good journalism.

Until we collectively recognize that journalists and their sources serve fundamentally distinct roles—one holding power to account, the other often wielding it—we cannot continue sharing these digital spaces. Journalists must reclaim their independence and reassert the boundaries that uphold the integrity of their work. Only then can we truly honor the spirit of press freedom.