NZ Media Council upholds complaint over inaccurate reporting on Sunfed Meats closure

The Media Council has upheld a complaint against the NZ Herald for publishing inaccurate information about the closure of plant-based food company Sunfed Meats.

The New Zealand Media Council has upheld a complaint against the NZ Herald for publishing inaccurate information about the closure of plant-based food company Sunfed Meats.

The complaint, lodged by founder Shama Lee, was upheld under Principle (1) Accuracy, Fairness and Balance and Principle (12) Corrections, following the publication of a story that falsely claimed liquidators had been appointed to the company.

On 23 May 2024, the NZ Herald published an article titled “Liquidator appointed for chicken-free chicken maker Sunfed: What went wrong”, which incorrectly stated that Sunfed was in liquidation.

In reality, the company was undergoing a solvent wind-down. Ms Lee’s lawyers immediately contacted the publication, prompting the removal of the article within hours of its publication.

NZME, the publisher, acknowledged the error, apologised, and re-published an earlier April 8 article, with correct details but not acknowledging the original error about the company being in liquidation.

NZME has maintained, throughout that the 23 May article, while incorrect in parts, was not defamatory, and nor was the use of a publicity image of Ms Lee an invasion of her privacy.

Correspondence regarding a retraction statement ensued, with the parties ultimately unable to reach agreement on terms.

The Media Council found that the error was significant and damaging, as it implied mismanagement and questioned the competence of Sunfed’s directors.

While NZME cited ongoing legal negotiations as the reason for not publishing a correction, the Media Council ruled that this did not excuse the failure to correct a serious factual inaccuracy.

The original 8 April article, “Chicken-free chicken maker Sunfed Meat shuts: What went wrong”, detailed the company’s financial history, including a $10 million capital raise, and attributed its closure to Covid-related disruptions and lack of investor support.

Ms Lee objected to the phrase “burning through $10 million,” arguing it implied mismanagement. The Media Council found the phrase graphic but not inaccurate, noting the funds had been spent and the company had ceased operations.

Ms Lee also raised concerns about the use of her photograph. This was not upheld as the Media may publish photographs of persons who feature in a newsworthy story, which this was.

There were other alleged inaccuracies, but these additional issues were not considered by the Media Council, as they were raised outside the formal complaint timeframe and long after the initial complaint to NZME.

NZME admitted the 23 May article headline was incorrect and removed it swiftly, offering the publication of an apology and retraction with due prominence. However, as stated no correction or apology has since been published.

The Media Council emphasised that the responsibility to correct significant errors lies with the publication, not the complainant, and that responsibility applies even if there are legal threats.

Obvious errors are not fixed by just taking down an electronic article and publishing an earlier article with correct details. Readers should be informed with due prominence of the error. The failure to publish a corrective statement breached Principle (12).

The Council understands NZME’s wish to not jeopardise legal discussion. However, the Council concluded that, despite this, NZME should have promptly (when legal negotiations had not led to an agreement), published a corrective statement acknowledging that the liquidation headline was in error.

The full Media Council ruling can be found at Media Council - Shama Lee against the New Zealand Herald.