INDEPENDENT NEWS

Complaint on story published by the Herald and NewstalkZB

Published: Fri 31 Mar 2017 03:01 PM
Notice to media: Please take note of the following complaint on a story published by the Herald and NewstalkZB
[Scoop note: The Herald article is not currently available. The Newstalk article appears to be here.]
--
Hi Shayne,
I am writing to complain about a story (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1=11828849) and associated comment by Barry Soper relating to our book Hit and Run. The story says that we were wrong about a type of weapon cartridges pictured in a photo in the book and that this casts a shadow over the accuracy of the the book.
However the basis for the criticism is something that the story says is suggested and inferred by the book when neither of these is what we actually said in the book. It was just someone jumping to conclusions on the basis of an illustration caption. We have been advised there are grounds for a complaint to the press council, however we would much rather sort this out by you adding a comment to the story there and then a follow up story that presents our position on these claims.
Can you please add the following words near the top of the current news story and Barry Soper may like to amend his opinion piece accordingly?
"The book does not claim that those weapon cartridges came from the SAS and indeed in another illustration (on page 49) the authors explain that they are Apache helicopter weapons. The illustration in the book shows objects collected by the villagers after the raid and the caption refers only to two drink bottles pictured, which the villagers thought were left by snipers. There was no suggestion that the weapon cartridges were from the SAS. If we had been asked before the story was printed, we could have cleared up this misunderstanding."
Then a follow up story could present the same points.
The obvious thing to do was to check the story with us, which was after all based on assumption, not anything we wrote in the book. The story says that a reporter tried unsuccessfully to contact Jon Stephenson, but they could have contacted me. Also, the point I make here is obvious and so even without contacting us should have made a reporter wonder whether the story was correct.
We have no problem with critical comment about the book, of course, but it needs to be based on accurate information and be balanced and fair.
best wishes,
Nicky

Next in New Zealand politics

Decision halt collection of client data welcomed
By: Comvoices
New Zealand's embarrassing Blasphemy Law here to stay
By: Humanist Party
Fifth Rotation of NZDF Troops Heads to Iraq
By: New Zealand Defence Force
Auditor-General standing aside for independent review
By: Office of the Auditor-General
SSC to probe Ministry's treatment of whistleblowers
By: BusinessDesk
SSC investigation of whistle blower treatment
By: State Services Commission
An important step towards restoring faith
By: Public Service Association
Speaker Misrepresents New Zealand First on Inquiry Decision
By: New Zealand First Party
On the Auditor-General: Stand Down Only Option
By: New Zealand First Party
English Should Stand Down Matthews Immediately
By: New Zealand First Party
Whistle-Blowers the Victims – And Pressure on Them Again
By: New Zealand First Party
PSA supports independent inquiry into MoT fraud
By: Public Service Association
SSC investigation should be wide and thorough
By: New Zealand Taxpayers' Union
View as: DESKTOP | MOBILEWe're in BETA! Send Feedback © Scoop Media