Make a Complaint Make a Complaint

Martin Ryder against the New Zealand Herald

Case Number: 3869

Council Meeting: 8 June 2026

Decision: Upheld

Publication: New Zealand Herald

Principle: Accuracy, Fairness and Balance
Headlines and Captions
Corrections

Ruling Categories: Accuracy
Balance, Lack Of
Errors
Headlines and Captions
Unfair Coverage

Overview

1. On 23 March 2026, the NZ Herald published an article Debt Awareness Week: Four in five New Zealanders ashamed to admit they are struggling. Martin Ryder complained that the article breached Principle (1) Accuracy, Fairness and Balance, and Principle (6) Headlines and Captions. As the article was subsequently corrected, the Media Council also considered Principle (12) Corrections. The complaint is upheld under Principles (1), (6), and (12).

The Article

2. As suggested in the headline, the article was published during Debt Awareness Week. It covered a Talbot Mills survey commissioned by DebtManagers on New Zealanders’ experience of and attitudes towards debt. The article cited statistics from the survey results and comments from a representative from DebtManagers.

3. The headline, as initially published, claimed four in five New Zealanders are ashamed to admit they are struggling. The article included data from the survey to show 60% of New Zealanders have struggled or are struggling with debt. It also said 69% of respondents to the survey believed people would judge those who cannot manage debt, and “67% believed there was a ‘lot of shame’ in New Zealand around debt problems.”

4. In response to Mr Ryder’s complaint, the NZ Herald changed the headline to read: Four in five New Zealanders say people embarrassed to admit they are struggling with debt. It also changed the article to include data to support the headline: “Of those surveyed, 86% agreed with the statement ‘people feel embarrassed to admit they are struggling with debt’.”

The Complaint

5. Mr Ryder complained the headline of the original article was not supported by the content. He said he was struggling with the maths:

The title gives me the impression that 80% of all Kiwis are ashamed of problems they have with debt, so I guess one fifth of us are OK. Maybe they are not in debt or not ashamed.

Your article states " ...research showed that 60% of New Zealanders have struggled or are struggling with debt, with 28% currently struggling and 32% previously".

6. Mr Ryder considered the correction an admission that the original headline was not true. He said:

The Herald's response confirms the headline was not true, there wasn't, and still isn't, any survey data to justify stating 80% of us are struggling, ashamed, or embarrassed. The article's headline has since been changed, using similar words to convey a completely different meaning.

7. Mr Ryder noted the NZ Herald did not respond to his complaint or correct the article until he had escalated it to the Media Council.

The Response

8. The NZ Herald accepted that:

 the original version of the article did not explicitly include the survey figure supporting the headline claim that “four in five New Zealanders” felt ashamed to admit financial struggle. This omission was an error.

9. The NZ Herald said the survey data supporting the headline was available and should have been included in the article. It said the correction “ensured alignment between the headline and the article content” and “addressed the inaccuracy raised”.

10. The NZ Herald regretted that its response to Mr Ryder’s complaint was delayed beyond the NZ Herald’s usual 10 working day timeframe. It explained this was due to the desk editor’s illness and subsequent annual leave. It pointed out that once it had received the complaint from the Media Council, it acted quickly, responding to Mr Ryder and correcting the article.

The Discussion

Accuracy and headline

11. Mr Ryder complained the article breached both Principles (1) and (6). Principle (1) requires articles to be accurate, and Principle (6) says:

Headlines, sub-headings, and captions should accurately and fairly convey the substance or a key element of the report they are designed to cover.

12. The Council notes the NZ Herald agrees the headline of the original article was not supported by the content of the article, which breaches Principle (6). They were right to do so.  The original headline indicated wrongly that 80% of New Zealanders were struggling with debt. The NZ Herald corrected the article, and Mr Ryder did not contest the accuracy of the corrected headline and article. The Media Council accepts the changes to the headline and the article mean the headline now meets the requirement in Principle (6) for the headline to “accurately and fairly convey … a key element of the report”.

13. The NZ Herald amended the opening sentence of the article and added information to provide the data on which the opening and headline was based. In support of the headline, the corrected article included the data (86% agree “people feel embarrassed …”) on which the corrected headline was based.

Original opening sentence
Four out of five Kiwis are embarrassed to admit they are struggling to deal with debt …

Corrected opening sentence
More than half of Kiwis have struggled with debt and four in five say people are embarrassed to admit it ...

14. However, the NZ Herald has not provided information to show either the original headline, or opening sentence was supported by data from the survey. The NZ Herald has, in the corrected article, included information to support the amended headline.

15. The original headline and opening sentence referred to four out of five Kiwis saying they were ashamed to admit they were struggling. But the survey results were based on agreement with the statement: People feel embarrassed to admit they are struggling. This is quite a different proposition, and the Council finds the original article breached Principle (1)’s requirement for articles to be accurate.

Corrections

16. Principle (12) Corrections says:

A publication’s willingness to correct errors enhances its credibility and, often, defuses complaint. Significant errors should be promptly corrected with fair prominence.

17. The Media Council is not satisfied the NZ Herald acted quickly enough to correct the story. Mr Ryder complained on 27 March, two days after the NZ Herald published the article. The NZ Herald did not respond to Mr Ryder or correct the article until 24 April, almost a month later.

18. The NZ Herald explained the delay by saying the desk editor had been unavailable. Members of the Media Council are expected to have robust systems in place to ensure complaints are dealt with, irrespective of whether any particular employee is present in the office.

19. The NZ Herald added a note at the end of the article to advise readers the article had been updated: “*This story has been updated from the original version.” However, the Media Council is not satisfied that this complies with the requirement of Principle (12) for significant errors to be corrected with “fair prominence”. In this instance, fair prominence would have been a specific reference to the error and a statement as to how it has been corrected.

 

Decision: The complaint is upheld under Principles (1), (6), and (12).

 

Council members considering the complaint were Hon Raynor Asher (Chair), Hank Schouten, Bernadette Courtney, Tim Watkin, Guy MacGibbon, Scott Inglis, Ben France-Hudson, Judi Jones, Alison Thom, Jo Cribb

Scott Inglis declared a conflict of interest and did not vote