Jean Charest considers suing Radio-Canada over corruption allegations

The media became 'the story' during days 9 and 10 of Quebec's election campaign.

On Wednesday night, a Radio-Canada (a.k.a. French CBC) news report suggested that a secret 2009 provincial police surveillance operation was immediately halted after the suspect — a construction-union official — met Quebec premier Jean Charest at a Montreal hotel.

While the report didn't explicitly allege Charest interfered in the investigation, it cited anonymous sources suggesting police get cold feet when an operation gets too close to the government.

Quebec journalist Manon Cornellier says she was uncomfortable with the way the story was presented.

[ Full Yahoo! coverage: Quebec election 2012 ]

In a column for L'actualite.com, she suggests the story's French headline and lead-in, on Radio Canada's website, were incendiary and that readers would have had to read past the first couple of paragraphs to learn that there was actually no real "evidence."

Needless to say, the report has raised the ire of Charest.

On Thursday morning, the Liberal leader denied the allegations and lashed out at the CBC saying the timing of the report was tantamount to a politically motivated smear job.

According to CTV News, Charest said people often discuss the ethics of politicians, but they should also scrutinize journalists' ethics.

"My conscience is clear this morning," he said.

"I don't think that's the case for the journalists, and those who are running [Radio Canada] and made this decision."

He added that he would consider suing Radio-Canada over the report, or issuing a complaint with its ombudsman after the election.

[ More Political Points: Vancouver spends $3 million on new website ]

In their defence, Radio-Canada reporters told CTV Montreal that the timing of the story had nothing to do with the election campaign. They said the story was ready for air and felt they would be open to criticism if they held the story until after the September 4 election.

The debate has spilled over into the newspaers and Twittersphere with Quebec journos and pundits asking themselves the following question: Should unproven allegations from unnamed sources be publicized in the middle of a heated election campaign?

Former Brian Mulroney aide and now political analyst Norman Spector has been one of the more vocal critics of the story on Twitter:

Political scientist Bruce Hicks says he wouldn't have gone 'to-air' with the story at all.

"There is no evidence that this observed conversation with the [union official and] Premier was about the police investigation — both parties deny it — and no evidence that, even if it were, that the Premier was responsible for the surveillance being terminated," he told Yahoo! Canada News.

"The story was factually accurate. But it does leave the impression of interference. I would not have put it on the air without evidence of causality."

Whether the story affects Charest's election chances remains to be seen.