Where is The Herald’s apology to Amanda Bailey?

Written By: - Date published: 11:03 am, July 4th, 2015 - 19 comments
Categories: accountability, journalism - Tags: , , , ,

On Friday The Herald published (as obscurely as it could) the following:

Press council rules against Herald on ‘Ponygate’ interview

On April 23, the New Zealand Herald published, front-page and online, an article about Amanda Bailey and the controversy over her reaction to the Prime Minister, John Key, when he persistently pulled her ponytail at the cafe where she worked as a waitress. The Press Council has upheld the substance of the complaints.
…
The Press Council is concerned with maintaining the press in accordance with the highest professional standards. In its view, the Herald, in respect of the Glucina article, has fallen sadly short of those standards.

So the Press Council found that The Herald fell “sadly short” of professional standards. Under the circumstances simply publishing the decision is not enough. NZ Herald – where is your apology to Amanda Bailey?

herald-press-council-amanda-bailey

19 comments on “Where is The Herald’s apology to Amanda Bailey? ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Paul 1
    4 July 2015 at 11:26 am

    Boycott the Herald.

  2. RedLogix 2
    4 July 2015 at 11:54 am

    In the meantime Herald Editor Tim Murphy is pretty much telling the Press Council to go fuck themselves:

    Herald editor-in-chief Tim Murphy said the newspaper’s response to the complaints resulted from the Herald’s own inquiry and “was based on interviews with the writer, photographer and editor concerned”.

    He denied any misrepresentation or subterfuge, saying Glucina did not work in PR nor did she have any PR clients.

    Murphy denied that any consent for publication was withdrawn, saying Bailey requested through one of the cafe owners that the piece not appear in Glucina’s gossip column. The paper was already being printed when a blogger contacted the newspaper on Bailey’s behalf.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/69926631/nz-herald-found-in-breach-over-ponytail-gate-article

    So no acknowledgement of wrong-doing, no apology, no consequences, no nothing.

    Exactly what is the point of the Press Council again?

  3. Charles 3
    4 July 2015 at 12:13 pm

    The argument has drifted into la la land now. Tim Murphy has a different story to the Press Council and Shane Currie, not to mention what Bomber says was said. So we have three, possibly four, seperate factions all duking it out to place blame on the other.

    I notice, Journalists of Honor and Accuracy that they are, they still can’t ascertain what time of day a particular phone call took place, and don’t much care. If that’s any indication of the veracity of the collective stories under examination, it’s no wonder no one knows what’s going on. How would they know what to apologise for?

  4. AmaKiwi 4
    4 July 2015 at 12:32 pm

    An apology is about saying, “I made a mistake and I have learned something.”

    There is a defect in NZ society which says, “I know everything I need to know and I don’t make mistakes.”

    It’s a personality trait essential to being a dictator.

  5. Skinny 5
    4 July 2015 at 12:36 pm

    Disgraceful when you consider the NZH are very quick to hand out an apology to Ms Collins and her husband Mr Tung, story linked below.

    It’s all about the money and unlike Mr Tung, Ms Bailey couldn’t show lawyers the money!

    http://m.nzherald.co.nz/northern-advocate/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503450&objectid=11472924

    • dukeofurl 5.1
      4 July 2015 at 12:52 pm

      Yes it seems that Ms Collins and Mr Tung have become the Jeffrey Archer of NZ politics, ” Say that and Ill sue”

  6. Sable 6
    4 July 2015 at 12:50 pm

    This is what happens when the watchdog has no teeth……In this instance and those like it writing a retraction and offering an apology should be mandatory…..

  7. Keith 7
    4 July 2015 at 1:32 pm

    Sadly the NZ Herald is far too committed to preserving the John Key brand to admit they did wrong.

    Mores the pity because they have shed plenty of customers with their sycophantic love of National and their role in Nationals Dirty Politics and they just can’t see it.

  9. Charles 9
    4 July 2015 at 2:48 pm

    While on the subject of apologies:

    Can the security detail apologise, too?
    And the employer?
    and whatever style of fraternity the Law organises itself into,
    and, what the hell, the Police too – they need to apologise.

    Because all these groups did nothing when they could have, and I still don’t understand how John Key is still PM after physically assaulting and harrassing a waitress for six months. The angle that the Herald used to go after A. Bailey was that she had political opinions. That’s kinda like saying because the girl in the park had a T-shirt on that said “I like to Dance”, it was ok for someone to attack her.

    There is a big poo-train coming down the tracks with the focus switching only to how the the Herald did what they did. In a way, The Herald, by making themselves the news, are about to victimise the victim again, once the old way, and again in a new way. Bomber has figured it out, but he won’t be able to stop it. The heat must be directed back to the original assailant.

    • Charles 9.1
      4 July 2015 at 4:08 pm

      August, 2012: Judith Collins recieves recommendation for the Harmful Digital Communications Bill briefing paper, from the Law Commission. She fast-tracks the progress and the bill is written in 2013; a bill which outlines definitions of harrassment and how a court may identify harrassment.

      April 25, 2015: The Daily Blog runs an exclusive story about the protracted assault and harrassment of a waitress in 2014, by John Key, leader of the National Party. Later he says what he did was “just horseplay”.

      But he already knew better. So did his Party. As did the Law Commission.

  10. Enough 10
    4 July 2015 at 3:45 pm

    Name change