The story detailed how Auckland Council ordered the removal of aluminium-framed double-glazed windows from a villa, citing a breach of special character area rules.
The story detailed how Auckland Council ordered the removal of aluminium-framed double-glazed windows from a villa, citing a breach of special character area rules.
The New Zealand Media Council has unanimously upheld a complaint against the New Zealand Herald over a misleading headline in a May 17 article about heritage rules and window alterations in Auckland’s Mt Eden.
The original headline, “Auckland villa owners told double-glazed windows violate heritage rules,” was found to beinaccurate in conveying the substance of the article. The story detailed how Auckland Council ordered the removal of aluminium-framed double-glazed windows from a villa, citing a breach of special character area rules. These rules require council approval for changes to street-facing exteriors in historic neighbourhoods.
Complainant Robert Brassey argued that the headline implied double-glazing itself was prohibited, when in fact it was the aluminium framing that violated heritage guidelines. He said the misleading headline fuelled anti-council and anti-heritage sentiment and required readers to read deep into the article to understand the true issue.
The Herald defended the headline, stating it reflected the homeowners’ frustration and that the article clarified the role of aluminium frames. The Herald also noted that the headline was later amended to “Auckland Mt Eden villa owners told aluminium-framed double-glazed windows violate heritage rules,” but did not issue a clarification or update the Facebook post, which used an even more provocative headline: “‘INSANITY’: Auckland villa owners told double-glazed windows violate heritage rules.”
The Media Council found that while the original headline was not factually incorrect, it was misleading by omission. It failed to specify that the aluminium framing—not the double-glazing—was the issue, leading readers to infer that modern window upgrades were incompatible with heritage protections. The Media Council noted that the amended headline was accurate and fair, but the delay in updating it and the lack of clarification diminished its effectiveness.
The Media Council concluded that the Herald’s efforts to correct the misleading impression were insufficient and that the original headline breached Principle (6) of its code, which requires headlines to fairly convey the substance of the report.
