Dear Stuff,

The Dominion Post and the Press used to be proud newspapers of record in Wellington and Christchurch respectively, pillars of their communities and trusted by many citizens as impartial vehicles of news.

But, increasingly, the newspapers and your website have turned into partisan tabloids, and public trust in you has diminished accordingly. A 2022 AUT survey shows that the public’s trust in Stuff’s news coverage has dropped by 4 percentage points in the past two years to 57%.

That may be because your coverage of events in the last few years has been patchy. Time and time again you have violated your own editorial code of practice and ethics, specifically the standards relating to the right of reply; accuracy, fairness and balance; and bias.

Let’s look at some of the principles from your own code of practice and ethics and see how you have been measuring up to them.

“Journalists should strive to represent all significant sides to a story, to serve our audience with a balanced picture.”

Suffice to say that your audience has failed to get a balanced picture of thousands of stories in the last two and a half years that have had only one side presented. In particular, these have been on the government’s handling of covid, including the severity of the virus, the safety and efficacy of the vaccine, and the need for the lockdowns, the vaccine pass and the mask and job mandates.

There are countervailing views on these all these issues backed by strong scientific research, which you have largely ignored—in effect, censored. Occasionally, you and the other media outlets have reported the findings of a study which run counter to the government’s narrative, but they’ve soon been buried in an avalanche of covid case numbers, musings by carefully-screened local experts and official pronouncements from the “single source of truth” in the Beehive.

“Publications should be bound at all times by accuracy, fairness and balance, and should not deliberately mislead or misinform readers by commission or omission. In articles of controversy or disagreement, a fair voice must be given to the opposition view.”

A fair voice and no deliberate misinformation? Stuff has aided in the marginalisation of ordinary kiwis holding views counter to the official story. You have effectively denied a voice to the hundreds of thousands of New Zealanders whose rights were temporarily stripped from them,
the effects of which are still being felt today.

In the last two and a half years, you have also demonised us. On the basis of flimsy evidence, you have painted us as a bunch of far-right, potentially violent extremists. You’ve labelled us as “conspiracy theorists”, “fascists,” “anti-science,” purveyors of “mis- and disinformation” and an “extremist fringe.”

You have focused your readers’ and viewers’ attention on the worst alleged language and behaviour you can find in an attempt to whip up fear in the general public. At the same time, you have skilfully avoided examining the substantive issues which are at the base of our grievances. You have effortlessly and heartlessly skimmed over people’s angst at losing jobs and income to the mandates and at their heartbreak at their loved ones being seriously injured and even dying following the jab.

“Any subject of a news story who is facing criticism or allegations must be afforded reasonable right of reply before publication.”

The most egregious example of you ignoring this guideline is your recently-released so-called documentary Fire and fury, in which the journalists responsible managed to convince themselves that the right of reply, a foundation stone of western journalism, did not apply due to the “dangerous” nature of the spokespeople who were under scrutiny. These dangerous people included three Voices for Freedom organisers
depicted as ardent knitters!

“Journalists should take care not to allow bias – or the perception of bias – in their reporting and in public comments…”

The comments relating to the previous three principles clearly show’s Stuff’s bias. That bias against groups in the freedom movement continues but has now been extended to thinly veiled attacks on candidates in the local body elections, who apparently represent a major threat to democracy. In fact, it may turn out that the exposure you’ve given these candidates backfires. While some voters may be warned off voting for the candidates, your articles will alert other voters to the presence of candidates who they feel truly represents their views. 

In conclusion, Stuff, we have seen how you frequently and routinely violate your own ethical code. The big question now is: when will you connect with your journalistic consciences? Standing up for all New Zealanders with a clear conscience might lose you your job, but isn’t that better than going against your own journalistic principles?

In an article in Stuff in February this year, your news head Mark Stevens said, in a moment of rose-tinted reflection, that Stuff was “holding the powerful to account, shining light on untruths and giving voices to the wronged…”

To this we would say that we applaud you doing these three things, but when do you plan to start? In contrast, recently, you’ve been allowing the powerful—politicians and corporations—to tell their untruths unchallenged while at the same time denying a voice to the wronged, such as the mandated and the vaccine-injured.

It’s not too late to change. Please revisit your editorial code of practice and ethics and seek to uphold it—for the sake of our country and its people.

Yours sincerely,

A group of concerned citizens