Ar­ti­cle dis­turbs

South Waikato News - - OPINION -

I am un­com­fort­able with, and rather dis­turbed by the ar­ti­cle ‘‘CEO ac­cused of covert deal in costly dog case’’ De­cem­ber 12, fea­tur­ing emails and a dog, and I feel a num­ber of ques­tions need an­swer­ing.

Was the ar­ti­cle really im­por­tant enough to take up the whole of the front page?

How did SWN come to sight the email in the first place?

Does the ed­i­tor con­sider the pub­lish­ing of the con­tents to breach pri­vacy?

Was the rather sen­ti­men­tal photo of the owner/carer and the dog in­cluded to at­tract a sym­pa­thy vote?

Did the ed­i­tor con­tact Coun­cil­lor Shat­tock or coun­cil chief ex­ec­u­tive David Hall be­fore go­ing to print? Does the ed­i­tor con­sider the ar­ti­cle to be balanced, or have bias?

Is there a hint of News of the World fi­asco about the ar­ti­cle?

To me, the ar­ti­cle is nowhere near balanced, has heavy un­der­tones of bias and does the South Waikato News and the ed­i­tor lit­tle or no credit.

D Blair Toko­roa

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from New Zealand

© PressReader. All rights reserved.