NZTR chose not to make a detailed rebuttal but the story did not have to rest there. Animal welfare is a matter of considerable public interest and rather than shutting down the story the Chronicle could have done further investigation to explore the issues.
However, it is clear that there was a lack of fairness and balance in the way this story was handled. It was one-sided. In correspondence with the NZTR the Chronicle acknowledged it failed to seek balance but undermined claims to transparency by failing to advise readers of mistakes in the way it reported this article.
Media Council Principle 1 states that 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.
The full Media Council decision is at www.mediacouncil.org.nz.