Lee Short against Whakaata Māori

Te Ao Māori News (Whakaata Māori) published an article on April 3, 2026, titled Misplaced iwi fight to see acknowledgement in New Zealand Statistics.

The story is about iwi across NZ being left out of official Stats NZ data. It outlines Ngāti Apakura history and whakapapa and what the data means for iwi who are working with Stats NZ to help reconnect descendants and rebuild a tribal record shaped by displacement.

The article includes comment from Ngāti Apakura kaumatua Taiporotu Huata about their history of land loss and the 1864 atrocities of Rangiaowhia when British Crown forces attacked a church and surrounding homes and set buildings alight while women, children and unarmed men were inside.

It reported official British records state 12 people were killed, while Ngāti Apakura maintain more than 100 deaths occurred.

Lee Short complained the article breached Media Council Principles (1) Accuracy, Fairness and Balance and (4) Comment and Fact.

He said it presented a contested historical narrative as established fact, without acknowledging that the events are subject to ongoing historical debate and that well documented perspectives were not acknowledged in the article.

Whakaata Māori said the article did not breach Media Council or Broadcasting Standards Authority standards.

It reported the perspective of a named researcher and descendant, who was clearly attributed within the story. It was not presented as a definitive or uncontested historical account, but as part of ongoing contemporary discussion and claims relating to Rangiaowhia.

The reporting was based on attributed material and reflected a legitimate perspective within current public discourse.

The Media Council has noted in previous decisions that there are varying historic accounts of what happened at Rangiaowhia. This story was plainly presenting the perspective of Ngāti Apakura kaumatua Taiporotu Huata.

The Council believes Whakaata Māori were entitled to report the views of a kaumatua who set out what happened from his iwi’s perspective. It was not proven to be inaccurate. The article made it clear there were differing accounts of the number who were killed. 

Decision: No grounds to proceed.