Carmen Kay against the Cambridge News
Case Number: 3778
Council Meeting: 8 September 2025
Decision: Upheld
Publication: Cambridge News
Principle:
Accuracy, Fairness and Balance
Headlines and Captions
Discrimination and Diversity
Ruling Categories:
Accuracy
Balance, Lack Of
Discrimination
Headlines and Captions
Unfair Coverage
Overview
1. On 12 June 2025 Cambridge News published a story headlined A Zulu for mayor? The article is about a 19-year-old Zulu man, adopted by family in South Africa, who is standing for the Waikato mayoralty. Carmen Kay has complained the article breaches Principles (1) and (7). The complaint is upheld for a breach of Principle (7) and is not upheld for breaching Principles (1) and (6).
The Article
2. The article is based on an interview with 19-year-old Fabio Rodrigues, a candidate in the three-horse race for the Waikato Mayoralty. He is also running to be the Tuakau-Pōkeno ward councillor. As stated, and this is at the centre of our decision, it is headed ”A Zulu for mayor?”.
3. As is not uncommon, the article profiled a candidate standing for election outlining their background and policy platforms. The Media Council encourages such articles.
4. The article tells an interesting story. It reports Mr Rodriques’ mother died shortly after he was born in Durban, South Africa. He was then abandoned by his father who left him on a rubbish bin. He was adopted by Elaine and John Rodrigues in South Africa and subsequently came to New Zealand with that family when he was eight.
5. Mr Rodrigues is reported as saying that his reason for standing resulted from a conversation with a ward councillor who promised “no matter who you are or where you come from, if you keep your nose clean and work hard, you’ll be able to have a good life, a steady pay cheque and the ability to afford food and housing.”
6. Mr Rodrigues is reported as noting that voters might think he is too young to be effective as Mayor and said if that was the case people should vote him on to council to be a councillor for everyone. He added while he is a member of the National Party his campaign is about community, not party politics.
The Complaint
7. Carmen Kay makes two complaints under Principle (1).
8. She says the headline A Zulu for mayor? can perpetuate harmful stereotypes, marginalise the candidate and reduce a qualified individual to their ethnicity, which she says is neither fair nor appropriate in professional journalism.
9. She says a headline should inform, not alienate, and highlight what makes a candidate a strong contender rather than reduce him to a single facet of his identity. Therefore, the headline was highly inappropriate and unprofessional.
10. Ms Kay says the article was unfair because it did not question his ability to do the job. Hence the question mark in the headline misleads and implies or asks if voters would want such a person as Mayor.
11. With respect to discrimination and diversity, Ms Kay says the article focused on race rather than qualifications and framed the story around Mr Rodrigues’ ethnicity. She says this questions his ethnicity as a Zulu, implying that it is unusual, questionable or even undesirable for a leadership position. This brings in Principle (7).
12. She says the implication is that his cultural background is more noteworthy than his achievements or qualifications and that such a standard would not be applied to candidates from more dominant or majority groups. It therefore undermines fair and equal representation.
The Response
13. The Cambridge News editor says he does not think having a Zulu identity makes a person either more or less desirable for leadership, and the headline mentioned his Zulu background because that is an important part of the story.
14. He says he cannot see the headline promoting a stereotype which he defines as a widely held but fixed and oversimplified image or idea of a particular type of person or thing.
15. He also states that other media outlets use ethnicity in headlines, and he asks what makes A Zulu for Mayor? different to a Kiwi, a Chinese farmer or a Basque for Mayor? Why should it be an issue when African heritage is mentioned?
16. He says he does not know how such a conclusion can be reached by right-thinking people and provides a list of headlines run by other media organisations that state ethnicity.
17. He says the Media Council is handling a significant rise in cases where readers want to take control of editorial content by dictating what stories are written, and how headlines are written.
The Discussion
18.The Council considers that Principle (1) Accuracy, Fairness and Balance, Principle (6) Headlines and Principle (7) Discrimination are relevant.
19. Principle (1) Accuracy reads – 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. Exceptions may apply for long-running issues where every side of an issue or argument cannot reasonably be repeated on every occasion and in reportage of proceedings where balance is to be judged on a number of stories, rather than a single report.
20. We do not see this headline being engaged under Principle (1) in terms of accuracy or balance. Mr Rodrigues is indeed of Zulu origin.
21. Principle (6) requires a headline to “accurately and fairly convey the substance or a key element of the report they are designed to cover”. While it is debateable whether Mr Rodrigues’ ethnicity is a key element of his candidacy for Mayor, the story is about his background, part of which is that he is of Zulu origin. The headline is accurate in this regard. Mr Rodrigues is a Zulu and does want to be Mayor.
22. However, the issue that does arise in this headline in terms of fairness is how the Publisher has framed the ethnicity of the candidate and how it is stated as a question. As we will set out, the headline clearly implies that having a person of Zulu background for Mayor is questionable. The question mark turns the Mayoral candidates’ ethnicity into a relevant factor in the election. This issue is best dealt with in relation to Principle (7).
23. Principle (7) Discrimination and Diversity reads - Issues of gender, religion, minority groups, sexual orientation, age, race, colour or physical or mental disability are legitimate subjects for discussion where they are relevant and in the public interest and publications may report and express opinions in these areas. Publications should not, however, place gratuitous emphasis on any such category in their reporting.
24.The Media Council recognises that the candidate’s ethnicity is novel and uncommon in the Waikato area, and that a young person with a Zulu background running for Mayor is newsworthy. Mr Rodrigues freely talked about his background which was reported and that was entirely fair and not a breach of Principle (7).
25. However, the clear implication of the question mark at the end of the heading, following the reference to a person running for Mayor who is a Zulu, is “do you want a Zulu for Mayor?”. It follows from this question that the fact that Mr Rodrigues is a Zulu is alone a reason why he should not be Mayor. It invites readers to query his Mayoral bid on the grounds of his race. It does not appear in the material before the Media Council that Mr Rodrigues in any way suggested in his interview that his race should be a focus in the article. Indeed, he is quoted as talking about his belief that the local council is bloated and needs to change, and the concern that he addresses is about his age. Mr Rodrigues is not quoted as saying anything about his ethnicity in terms of his candidacy. These considerations, in the words of Principle (7), show that the words with a question mark constitute a “gratuitous emphasis” on the candidate’s race.
26.The stark question that constituted the headline meant that Mr Rodrigues’ ethnicity was given gratuitous emphasis and in this negative way, effectively querying his suitability for the Mayor’s office on racist grounds. This was discriminatory.
Conclusion
27. This complaint is upheld because while the story itself does not breach Media Council principles, the headline, in particular the use of the question mark, constitutes a gratuitous reference to race and Principle (7) applies.
Decision: The complaint is upheld for a breach of Principle (7) but not for a breach of Principle (6).
Council members considering the complaint were Hon Raynor Asher (Chair), Guy MacGibbon, Marie Shroff, Reina Vaai, Hank Schouten, Rosemary Barraclough, Tim Watkin, Scott Inglis, Ben France-Hudson, Richard Pamatatau, Judi Jones