The credibility of reporting on spyware rests on a simple expectation. News organizations should scrutinize allegations against foreign governments as closely as they examine the companies and public authorities operating within their own borders. Renewed attention to Morocco over Pegasus brings that expectation into focus.
A new Amnesty International report has revived allegations concerning Moroccan surveillance practices. Morocco has repeatedly denied possessing or using Pegasus. The dispute places a substantial responsibility on newsrooms covering the story, including France 24. Readers need to understand what the evidence establishes, how conclusions were reached and which claims remain contested.
The seriousness of the allegations makes precision essential. Selection for targeting, successful infection and attribution to a particular operator are separate findings. Each requires supporting evidence. Reporting that compresses these stages into a single assertion risks giving audiences greater certainty than the underlying material warrants.
The same applies to testimony. Accounts from individuals claiming direct knowledge of intelligence operations can contribute significantly to an investigation. Their weight depends on the witnesses’ actual responsibilities, their access to information and the independent evidence supporting their statements.
Where anonymity is necessary, the burden of verification grows. Readers cannot examine the source’s identity or professional history themselves. They rely on journalists to explain the corroboration process and distinguish firsthand observations from information obtained through others.
An NGO report deserves examination on its merits. Its institutional standing gives its findings visibility, but does not remove the need to assess its methods. Equally, an official denial cannot settle a dispute by itself. Credible coverage must examine both the allegations and the response, making the strength and limits of the evidence clear.
For Morocco, the demand for such scrutiny is legitimate. Accusations involving intelligence services carry diplomatic and reputational consequences. Their repetition should therefore be accompanied by a clear account of what each new investigation adds.
That standard should also guide coverage of Europe’s surveillance industry.
The Predator Files investigations, published in 2023 by the European Investigative Collaborations network, with reporting from outlets including Mediapart, examined the international trade in intrusive surveillance technology. They brought attention to the Intellexa alliance and the activities of companies including France’s Nexa Technologies.
Those investigations raised questions about the businesses selling surveillance systems and the safeguards governing their export. They also directed scrutiny toward the public authorities responsible for licensing and oversight.
These issues deserve sustained attention. Export controls matter only if they meaningfully address the risks associated with the equipment being sold. Examining those controls requires journalists to follow commercial relationships, official decisions and the mechanisms intended to prevent abuse.
French journalists helped uncover the Predator story. Any claim that the entire French press ignored it would overlook their work. The relevant question concerns the wider response to those revelations, their prominence across major outlets and the persistence of follow-up reporting.
Initial publication is one measure of editorial commitment. Continued scrutiny provides another. Readers should be able to see whether questions raised about domestic companies and public authorities remain on the agenda after the first headlines fade.
A perception of unequal treatment emerges when allegations against Morocco receive recurring attention while the European supply chain receives less sustained scrutiny. Establishing the extent of that imbalance would require a systematic comparison of coverage. News organizations can nevertheless address the concern by making their editorial standards visible and applying them consistently.
The debate over spyware reaches across borders. It involves developers, brokers, exporters, customers and regulators. Coverage focused too narrowly on one alleged user leaves important parts of that system insufficiently examined.
French media have an opportunity to strengthen their reporting by following every part of that chain with comparable determination. Morocco’s denials should be presented accurately, allegations should be tested rigorously, and the responsibilities of European businesses and authorities should remain open to investigation.
The strongest journalism earns trust through that consistency. Its questions should remain equally demanding when an investigation leads abroad and when it brings reporters closer to home.
