Chris Rennie against Stuff
Case Number: 3914
Council Meeting: 12 October 2026
Decision: No Grounds to Proceed
Publication: Stuff
Principle: Accuracy, Fairness and Balance
Ruling Categories: Accuracy
Stuff published an article on June 27, 2026, titled Stuff owner Sinead Boucher: ‘Big tech are sucking the marrow out of our economy’.
The article was based on an interview in which Ms Boucher, who was identified as the Stuff Group owner and chief executive, talked about the impact of big tech on journalism and the future of the New Zealand media.
She called for big tech companies to be properly regulated and taxed. She urged Government to redirect advertising budgets away from their platforms which were harming society with online scams, misinformation, breaching suppressions, and social media for under 16s. She also said they scraped local news websites for information to power their AI products.
Chris Rennie in his complaint asked whether Ms Boucher was the sole beneficial owner of Stuff Group and whether there was any other beneficial ownership interests associated with Stuff that readers should have been informed of in the interests of transparency. He said such information could reasonably be considered material to readers assessing the interview and Ms Boucher’s comments.
Responding to his inquiry Stuff referred to an article it published three years ago. This reported Ms Boucher purchased Stuff Ltd in 2020, that 10 percent of the company had been transferred to a trust controlled by employee representatives and that Trade Me had a 50 percent shareholding in Stuff Digital Ltd, which was part of the Stuff Group.
Mr Rennie said: “The basis of my complaint is accuracy. The answer to my query about the true ownership of Stuff Ltd did not address my question.”
He also commented the article made no mention of “the Beneficial Owner who has anonymously registered a global security interest against all of Stuff Ltd.”
The Media Council did not consider there was any basis for this complaint.
Mr Rennie posed a question and received a response, he was not satisfied with that, but the Council’s role is not to get information for complainants. It can see no evidence that it was inaccurate to report that Ms Boucher owns Stuff and is its Chief Executive. Indeed, that is how she is reported in the media generally, and in Wikipedia, and other respected sources. The complaint showed no breach of Media Council Principles.
Decision: No grounds to proceed.
The article was based on an interview in which Ms Boucher, who was identified as the Stuff Group owner and chief executive, talked about the impact of big tech on journalism and the future of the New Zealand media.
She called for big tech companies to be properly regulated and taxed. She urged Government to redirect advertising budgets away from their platforms which were harming society with online scams, misinformation, breaching suppressions, and social media for under 16s. She also said they scraped local news websites for information to power their AI products.
Chris Rennie in his complaint asked whether Ms Boucher was the sole beneficial owner of Stuff Group and whether there was any other beneficial ownership interests associated with Stuff that readers should have been informed of in the interests of transparency. He said such information could reasonably be considered material to readers assessing the interview and Ms Boucher’s comments.
Responding to his inquiry Stuff referred to an article it published three years ago. This reported Ms Boucher purchased Stuff Ltd in 2020, that 10 percent of the company had been transferred to a trust controlled by employee representatives and that Trade Me had a 50 percent shareholding in Stuff Digital Ltd, which was part of the Stuff Group.
Mr Rennie said: “The basis of my complaint is accuracy. The answer to my query about the true ownership of Stuff Ltd did not address my question.”
He also commented the article made no mention of “the Beneficial Owner who has anonymously registered a global security interest against all of Stuff Ltd.”
The Media Council did not consider there was any basis for this complaint.
Mr Rennie posed a question and received a response, he was not satisfied with that, but the Council’s role is not to get information for complainants. It can see no evidence that it was inaccurate to report that Ms Boucher owns Stuff and is its Chief Executive. Indeed, that is how she is reported in the media generally, and in Wikipedia, and other respected sources. The complaint showed no breach of Media Council Principles.
Decision: No grounds to proceed.