By Family First
Family First wanted to place full-page advertisements in six major daily newspapers on Wednesday 19 July to coincide with the launch of their “What is a woman?” campaign. The newspapers were NZ Herald and Bay of Plenty Times (owned by NZME), Christchurch Press, The Post (Wellington) and Southland Times (owned by Stuff), and the Otago Daily Times (owned by Allied Press).
This is the advertisement…
All three companies approved the advertisement.
The Post, Christchurch Press & Southland Times (Stuff) on Monday…
NZ Herald and Bay of Plenty Times (NZME) on Tuesday…
The Otago Daily Times on Tuesday of last week!…
Now, here is the conclusive proof that all three companies colluded together in some way to ban our advertisement.
From NZ Herald on Tuesday night at 8.30pm…
The NZ Herald will try and claim that they hadn’t rejected the advertisement, but were “reconsidering” it. But they were first provided the advertisement on 27 June! At the very last moment, they refused to run the advertisement on the specific day requested – after approving it.
From Stuff (The Post, Christchurch Press, Southland Times) on the day that the advert was supposed to appear (“a late decision”)…
What are the “values” of Stuff? Exclusion if they don’t like your ad?
Remember – they had approved the advertisement.
But here’s the kicker. The Otago Daily Times (who also cancelled after approving the advertisement) reveals the full discussion that happened between the newspaper editors and the level of collusion at the top level.
“NZME heard we got grief”
“Stuff got wind of it”
“Our CEO followed suit”
“The CEOs and editors are speaking now”
The advert was cancelled in all newspapers that had previously approved and confirmed it:
* NZ Herald ❌
* Bay of Plenty Times ❌
* Dom Post ❌
* Christchurch Press ❌
* Southland Times ❌
* Otago Daily Times ❌
In a disturbing display of media censorship, the major daily newspapers have banded together to pull a full page advertisement at the 11th hour.
It should concern all of us that newspaper editors are now banding together to censor advertisements that they disagree with. Where does this place their coverage of the political debate leading up to the General Election? What else are they censoring?
The fact that they are working together to muzzle debate on controversial social issues is disturbing. Has the government funding of these media outlets spelt the end of independent public discourse on controversial social issues? It appears so.
Both the NZ Herald and the Otago Daily Times has since offered to place the advertisement in a later edition. However, this is well after the requested date which was coinciding with the launch of the campaign. Stuff have not made any similar offer.
Family First NZ has engaged lawyers and are considering their legal options.
Love Women xx
