Newspapers have a right and responsibility to state their position on matters of public interest, says the Press Council.
The council was commenting after declining to uphold complaints against the Herald made by Martyn Stewart, of Waitakere City.
Mr Stewart submitted that in particular a Dialogue piece by Joe Bennett on May 26 and an editorial on June 26 had unfairly condemned key members of the successful America's Cup squad who had decided to go to foreign syndicates for the 2003 challenge.
Mr Stewart said that, more generally, this attitude towards some of the leading sailors had caused the newspaper to fail to investigate the "secrecy surrounding the relinquishing of the administration of the last [Cup] defence organisation to the new organisation."
He suggested that the financial affairs of Team New Zealand had caused the best-known sailors to leave.
"It is easy to attack the sailors, as they are the visible and vulnerable ones. The real story is hidden by mystery and, presumably warranted, suspicion."
Mr Stewart said it was imperative that such issues be investigated by the media. He had written to the editor but had not had a response.
The Herald said that Mr Stewart's argument appeared to be based on the assumption that officers of Team New Zealand were guilty of some unspecified "malfeasance, corruption or fraud" for which there was no evidence. No such accusations had been made by departing team members.
For these reasons, and because of Mr Stewart's allegations of "criminal" behaviour on the part of the syndicate, his letters had not been published.
As for the claim that the Herald had not investigated the financial issues, the Herald had called on Team New Zealand to "reveal its financial information and beneficial arrangements" in the face of unsubstantiated public allegations. Moreover, the Herald and the Weekend Herald had "gone to some lengths ... to bring more transparency" to the financial structure, including revealing "a Scandinavian-based trust registration that afforded a high degree of confidentiality."
The Press Council noted that the Herald and Weekend Herald had published a range of articles on the affairs of Team New Zealand (at least 12 between March and June). In particular, Fran O'Sullivan on May 22 had weighed up various insinuations, including inadequate management, mishandling of the transfer of control from the old syndicate to the new and rumours about siphoning off profits.
She found that a rival syndicate had helped muddy the waters and that stringent requirements for carrying over debt - which the managers of the new New Zealand syndicate would have had to take on - had helped the two highest profile New Zealanders decide to take advantage of the seemingly unlimited funding offered by overseas syndicates.
A member of the incoming syndicate who had gone over the accounts had found nothing to suggest any siphoning-off of profits.
The Press Council could find no evidence to support the contention that the Herald had not tried to get at the truth about the affairs of Team New Zealand.
The council accepted that editors had finite resources for extensive investigatory journalism.
The Press Council also accepted that the Herald had no case to answer on the separate issue of editorial comment on the sailors' decisions to abandon the New Zealand cause for employment with overseas syndicates.
A newspaper clearly had the responsibility to articulate its own forthright position on a matter of such high public interest.
Press Council makes clear papers' rights
AdvertisementAdvertise with NZME.