Thomas Nash against Newstalk ZB
Case Number: 3699
Council Meeting: 2 December 2024
Decision: Upheld
Publication: Newstalk ZB
Principle:
Accuracy, Fairness and Balance
Comment and Fact
Ruling Categories:
Accuracy
Balance, Lack Of
Comment and Fact
Overview
1. On 23 October 2024 NewstalkZB published an opinion column by senior political correspondent Barry Soper headlined Barry Soper: How did Tory Whanau get the Wellington mayoralty? which said Ms Whanau was elected because of the Single Transferable Vote system and went on to criticise Ms Whanau’s performance in the role.
2. Thomas Nash complained under principles (1) Accuracy, Fairness and Balance and (4) Comment and Fact. The complaint is upheld.
The Article
3. The column as it was first published on October 23 devoted the opening four paragraphs to a claim that Ms Whanau’s ascension to the mayoralty, and Celia Wade Brown’s previously, was the result of the Single Transferrable Vote system.
4. The remainder of the article is a criticism of Ms Whanau’s performance as Wellington Mayor. It says she lacks intellectual rigour and has a shallow understanding of governance.
5. The article says Ms Whanau’s liking and then unliking of comments on Instagram criticising the Government’s appointment of a Crown observer to the Wellington City Council is indicative of an “inconsistency that’s become the hallmark of Whanau’s leadership”.
6. The day after first publication, the column’s headline was changed to Barry Soper: Inconsistency the hallmark of Wellington Mayor Tory Whanau’s leadership, which brought it into line with the headline that was used by NZ Herald, which also published the column.
7. On November 4, twelve days after the column was first published, the opening four paragraphs were removed, leaving the remaining paragraphs unchanged apart from a small edit for sense.
8. A correction was added at the top of the column saying an earlier version “inferred” Ms Whanau relied on the Single Transferrable Voting system for her win. “While there were seven iterations of counting to reach the threshold to win, she did receive the largest number of first preference votes,” the correction says.
The Complaint
9. Mr Nash complains under principles (1) Accuracy, Fairness and Balance and (4) Comment and Fact. Mr Nash says the “main assertion underpinning the article” - that Ms Whanau was elected because of STV - is factually incorrect.
10. Mr Nash says the correction, which says the column originally “inferred” Ms Whanau won because of STV, is insufficient. The article asserts rather than infers that incorrect premise, Mr Nash says.
11. Mr Nash says the correction further confuses the matter by raising the seven iterations of counting. This is not relevant because the iterations are an inherent part of the STV process and Ms Whanau would have won outright under any system, Mr Nash says.
12. Mr Nash says there are serious and significant matters of public interest at stake, including the democratic mandate of the mayor of our capital city and the legitimacy of local democracy in general. He says it should be crystal clear that the voting system had absolutely nothing to do with Ms Whanau’s win.
13. Mr Nash says a clearer correction should be published separately, not just as an amendment to the article.
The Response
14. NZME, parent company of NewstalkZB and the NZ Herald, which also published the column, acknowledges that it was inaccurate to say Ms Whanau won because of STV – as Ms Whanau received the largest number of first preference votes. Both publishers have retracted the relevant statements and published a correction with fair prominence at the beginning of the column, NZME says.
15. The change to the headline was to reflect the fact that the purpose of the column was to convey Mr Soper’s perspective on Ms Whanau’s suitability as mayor and not to analyse the STV system, NZME says.
The Discussion
16. The factual inaccuracy at the heart of Mr Nash’s complaint is not disputed. Newstalk ZB took steps to remedy this by amending the headline, removing the first four paragraphs of the article that referenced STV, and placing a correction at the top of the article. What remains is a criticism of Ms Whanau’s performance in office in a clearly labelled opinion piece.
17. However, NZME should have considered Mr Nash’s complaint with more urgency and made the changes earlier. Mr Nash first raised the inaccuracy with NZME on October 24 and again on October 29. It was not until November 4 that the article was corrected. This was a serious error that cast unfounded doubt on the legitimacy of the process that led to Ms Whanau becoming Mayor. Any correction should have been made very quickly to minimise damage to Ms Whanau’s reputation and the validity of her election.
18. Mr Nash says the fundamental assertion of the article is that Ms Whanau won the election because of the voting system. NZME says the purpose of the column was to convey Mr Soper’s opinion of Ms Whanau’s performance in the role, not to analyse the STV system.
19. Regardless of the intention, the incorrect claim about STV’s role in Ms Whanau’s election remained live for close to a fortnight. Principle (4) Comment and Fact states: “Material facts on which an opinion is based should be accurate”. By the time the incorrect paragraphs were removed and the correction added, the article had been overtaken by newer content on newstalkzb.co.nz. A vastly larger audience would have seen the false claim in the original version than would have seen the updated version and correction.
20. The Media Council agrees with Mr Nash that the correction falls short in saying the column inferred Ms Whanau won because of STV, when in fact it had definitively asserted it. The council also agrees that the correction confuses the matter by mentioning the iterations of counting under STV, rather than simply stating that the original article’s claim about STV’s role in Ms Whanau’s election was incorrect.
21. The complaint under principle (1) Accuracy, Fairness and Balance and (4) Comment and Fact is upheld.