Susan Rowley against the Southland Times

The Southland Times and other Stuff newspapers published a cartoon on March 20, 2025, titled Seymour putting “Act supporter” Jesus to work….

The cartoon mocks ACT Party leader David Seymour’s claim that Jesus would have been an ACT supporter. It depicts Mr Seymour standing by a figure of Jesus and saying “Thank you white Jesus for turning that water into a delectable bottle of carbonic maceration pinot noir from Central Otago...now, if you could turn our school lunches into something edible. That would be a true miracle or, you know, break off a few pieces of bread from that body of yours.”

Susan Rowley complained the cartoon breached Media Council Principle (7) Discrimination and Diversity, as it discriminated against Christians and mocked their religious practice.

“Of particular offense is the reference 'white Jesus', which insinuates that Jesus only cares about 'white' people. History shows us that Jesus was most likely dark skinned, and Christians believe he came for all people.

“The whimsical reference to the Body of Christ, as received in Holy Communion is disgraceful and blasphemous. A desecration of something regarded as holiest of holy,” Ms Rowley said.

In its response Stuff said: “We recognise that some readers will take offence at cartoons which seek to satirise religion in some way. We do not set out to cause such offence; however, we have to balance that risk with our wish to provide our opinion contributors - particularly our cartoonists - with significant latitude to express their views and to decide how they wish to portray current issues.

“I would point out that in this case, the (satirical) reference to Jesus and his supposed interest in politics was made by the ACT leader, David Seymour, and the cartoonist is playing off those widely reported comments. I believe Seymour, not Jesus, is the cartoonist's target, but I appreciate that you hold a different view. and you have made that view very clear. We respect that and have taken your concerns on board. “

Media Council Principle (7) Discrimination and Diversity, states: “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.”

The Media Council repeats comments made in a previous ruling on two earlier complaints about this cartoon (Case No: 3729).

It ruled there were no grounds to proceed as nothing had been advanced to show a breach of Principle (7).

The Media Council considered the complaint under its wider remit which states there is no more important principle in a democracy than freedom of expression.

Cartoons regularly celebrate that freedom by ridiculing politicians, and this one was clearly aimed at Mr Seymour for his alleged mishandling of the school lunch programme and his controversial comment that Jesus would have been a member of his party.

The cartoon did not say or show offensive things about God or religion, which is the common definition of blasphemy. While some people may consider any satirical reference to Jesus to be blasphemous or offensive, there are no universally accepted standards on how religious figures can or cannot be depicted. Indeed, the cartoon figure of Jesus is recognisable as Jesus because it follows his image as depicted in religious art, Jesus appears to be looking sideways in some surprise at Mr Seymour.

Further, in a society where freedom of expression is valued, it is impossible to lay down a rule that could protect everybody from everything that may offend them. As the Media Council has often stated, there is no right to not be offended. It is always a matter for editors to decide what their readers will accept, tolerate, or appreciate. That is not something the Media Council can dictate, and no breach of the Principles can be seen.

Decision:  No grounds to proceed.