> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://goodoil.news/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# Refund Expected after Editor’s Maori Ward Advert Whinge
- URL: https://goodoil.news/refund-expected-after-editors-maori-ward-advert-whinge/
- Published: 2020-11-20T20:30:00.000Z
- Updated: 2020-11-20T03:10:11.000Z
- Author: General
- Tags: Advertising, Media, NZ, #wp, #wp-post, #Import 2024-07-17 02:38

**Hobson’s Pledge Trust**  
[hobsonspledge.nz](https://www.hobsonspledge.nz/?ref=goodoil.news)

*Stuff* should refund the money paid for an advert after the editor of the newspaper in which it appeared publicly criticised it, Hobson’s Pledge spokesperson **Don Brash** said today.

The [advertisement ](https://www.stuff.co.nz/taranaki-daily-news/news/300162580/north-taranaki-midweek-advertisement-fell-short-of-our-values?fbclid=IwAR1VlGkNpDJlbMU3%5F-3samdi4hNrNMWPy-FVWcPiF0ypApo-kVQtAFtQ5RM&ref=goodoil.news)in the North Taranaki Midweek newspaper, paid for by the controversial lobby group Hobson’s Pledge, asked readers to collect signatures calling for a referendum on the New Plymouth District Council’s latest proposal to establish a Maori ward.

The advertisement was booked in the name of Hobson’s Pledge and we have advertised with *Stuff* for around four years, Dr Brash said.

The names of contact persons were included in the advert, as was an address that was clearly not a *Stuff* address, he said.

If the newspaper thought for a minute that readers may not realise that the advertisement was an advertisement, it could have placed the word “advertisement” at the top of the advertisement, Dr Brash said.

> An advertisement published in the November 18 edition of the North Taranaki Midweek did not represent the views of *Stuff* and fell short of our values.

> As editor of the *Stuff* Taranaki newsroom I apologise on behalf of the Taranaki team for the anger, hurt and confusion this has caused.

> The advertisement in the free community newspaper, which asked readers to collect signatures calling for a referendum on the establishment of a Maori ward at the New Plymouth District Council, was not labelled as advertising.

> This was misleading and left some readers with the impression *Stuff* wanted to stop the establishment of such a ward.

> This is not the case.

This is surely a unique situation, when a newspaper accepts money for an advertisement, knowingly publishes the advert, and then publishes a story complaining that the advertisement was misleading, he said.

If as the complaining editor wrote, the role of a news organisation is to both inform and facilitate fair and robust discussion, the advertisement has certainly succeeded, as has Stuff’s original decision to publish it, Dr Brash said.

Please share this article so that others can discover *The BFD*