*MA against the Southland Times

The Southland Times published article on August 24, 2025, titled Couple’s behaviour and attitudes likely to infuriate each other, judge finds.

This was a court report on the conviction of a man found guilty on seven of 12 charges of violence against his wife. It recorded the comments the judge made at the conclusion of a three-day trial in the Invercargill District Court. The judge detailed some instances of violent behaviour over four years but said both parties had to take responsibility for much of what occurred.

*MA complained that the headline was misleading and that the article was not an accurate, fair or balanced report of the evidence she had heard through the hearing.

“The headline, the choice of language, and the emphasis all worked to minimise what happened and to present it as though both people were equally to blame.”

“The article goes into detail about excuses and explanations: relationship stress, “both being capable of violence,” the need for rehabilitation. Meanwhile, the fear, trauma, and very real harm to the victim are barely mentioned. This is not equal coverage. It tips the weight towards sympathy for the offender and away from the impact on the survivor. Patterns of coercive control and cycles abuse are completely missed and not mentioned. It does not cover safety concerns for the survivor or the children that were also put in serious danger.”

“The quotes are only focused on the ones that portray minimisations or mutual blame and not ones focusing on the concerns of violence to a pregnant woman or the harm in front of children. The chosen quotes reveal major reporting bias and selective misrepresentations.”

She said the language used diminished the seriousness of deliberate violence and echoed the minimisations abusers use.

“Reporting like this does not help survivors. It does not acknowledge the fear people live with, or the enormous strength and struggles it takes to come forward after years of abuse. Instead, it risks silencing others, making them believe they will not be believed or will be blamed if they speak out. Further leading to keeping abuse hidden and suffered in silence.”

“The article states that there were ‘enormous amounts of material’ presented, yet it fails to explain which side that evidence supported. It also refers to ‘pictures of injuries to both,’ without mentioning the ratio or the context. By leaving this vague, the article implies a false equivalence — as though the evidence was evenly balanced. I know this to be false. This omission is a serious minimisation.”

In response The Southland Times said it stood by its reportage as accurate, fair and in line with Media Council Principles. The reporter involved was a highly experienced court reporter.

It added the language and framing were direct comments made by the judge during sentencing.

“It is the role of our court reporter to accurately reflect what is said in the courtroom, including remarks from the bench, even when those remarks may be upsetting or controversial.”

“The article did not seek to minimise or excuse violence. Alongside the judge’s comments, it included the Crown prosecutor’s strong objections, her warning against victim-blaming, and her reminder that assaults on a pregnant woman are “moderately serious, not trivial". This provided balance by presenting both the judge’s reasoning and the Crown’s position.”

The Media Council notes this article did not directly report any of the evidence as it was given during the three-day hearing. Those who sat in court throughout the trial, as this complainant did, would understandably have a far more graphic understanding of the violent behaviour that occurred than could be conveyed in this relatively brief summary of the case.

Clearly the article relied almost entirely on the judges’ comments as he concluded the hearing. The violence was described, and the article did not minimise it. Those remarks were a summation of what he heard and his judgement.  We have no evidence to show that the judges’ remarks were misreported.

 
Decision: No grounds to proceed.

 
*The initials MA are used to avoid breaching reporting rules relating to court cases involving children.