Ourday of reckoning
It is not unusual to take stock when you hit a milestone birthday, look back, reflect and consider what contribution you might have made to society. There will be things you are proud of and often some regrets.
Our oldest paper turned 160 not so long ago. We have other papers on the cusp of their 150th birthdays. The Stuff website celebrated turning 20 this year. So it is only fair we too take stock.
Without a doubt, our journalism has impacted on New Zealand’s history and helped maintain democracy.
The value of the independent journalism we have created over that time is tangible. But not beyond reproach. There is awell-worn and ageold journalists’ adage: we hold the powerful to account.
But since Stuff now values trust as its primary measure of success and has introduced the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi into its company charter, we needed to ensure our own backyard was in order first, to hold ourselves to account too.
Today, we have done that. Stuff’s audience is an almost mirror image of New Zealand’s population – proudly multicultural. We wanted to know whether our reporting, our coverage of key historical events and the voices in our newspapers and websites were also a reflection of that diverse audience and population.
Over several months, about 20 journalists and a production team – led by our Pou Tiaki editor Carmen Parahi – have embarked on a challenging – and, at times, difficult – critique of our own history.
Had we marginalised Ma¯ori, stereotyped Ma¯ori, been responsible for shaping social
Stuff editorial director
Mark Stevens says the organisation’s reporting of Ma¯ori issues has seldom been fair or balanced.
stigma against Ma¯ori?
Importantly, had we failed our own editorial checklist of fairness, accuracy and balance with one important segment of our audience, of New Zealand?
We looked nationally, and locally. We looked at child abuse, Parihaka, at Moutoa Gardens, the police raids in Te Urewera, the Foreshore and Seabed Act, and more.
Across the board, the findings do not make for good reading.
Our coverage of Ma¯ori issues over the past 160 years ranged from racist to blinkered.
Seldom was it fair or balanced in terms of representing Ma¯ori.
One front page article from the 1800s reported this: ‘‘For an inferior race, coming in contact with one greatly superior, there are generally but two possible and conceivable destinies – absorption or destruction.’’
That racist tone was not uncommon back then.
Dial ahead more than
100 years and the narrative remained divisive. Take the Foreshore and Seabed Act debate, as another example:
‘‘Debate over Ma¯ori customary rights to the foreshore and seabed is making New Zealanders nervous ...’’
Or: ‘‘Kiwis will remain free to walk the beaches around New Zealand’s coastline but the Government is facing revolt from Ma¯ori over its plans for the foreshore and seabed.’’
As Stuff national correspondent Charlie Mitchell found in his analysis, our language often split New Zealand into two – Kiwis and Ma¯ori. Two separate groups, us and them.
Imentioned trust is now the key measure of Stuff’s success.
I have written myself that without public trust, journalism has nothing.
But, importantly, one of the most vital proxies of trust is diversity. If we have been monocultural in our reporting – and we have – we have not been diverse. Therefore, we have not always been trustworthy.
At times – notably in our distant past – we have been outright racist. At other times – more often in our recent history – we have looked through a single Pa¯keha¯ lens.
I amsorry for that. Sorry to Ma¯ori. The monocultural aspects of our journalism have not served Aotearoa New Zealand well. Apologies are hollow without a commitment to change, to do better in the future.
We have begun that journey, with much distance to travel.
Our chief executive and owner has introduced the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi – partnership, participation and protection – into our company’s charter.
The newsroom has committed to the principles too in its recently published Editorial Code of Practice and Ethics, to represent all of Aotearoa New Zealand in the voices it publishes.
We have partnered with Ma¯ori Television to increase Ma¯ori issues journalism. In NZ Made/Na¯ Nı¯u Tı¯reni, we ripped open the scab of New Zealand’s history and reported the unsettling truth about how our country was made.
We have developed our own Pou Tiaki section, initially to showcase Ma¯ori stories and, later, to represent minorities too. We have begun translating a small number of our stories into te reo Ma¯ori.
Stuff has also committed to increasing the number of Ma¯ori journalists in our newsrooms.
We have established the Pou Tiaki editor’s role, to help encourage diversity in our thinking and practices.
Our new parliamentary press gallery reporter Joel Maxwell is fluent in te reo Ma¯ori, focused on politics from aMa¯ori perspective.
And, in Auckland we have a new Pasifika-focused reporter, Torika Tokalau.
But, like any commitment, this is not a set and forget.
The distance left to travel on our journey includes ensuring our journalism is for all New Zealanders and trying to repair our relationship with Ma¯ori.
That will take time and effort and, from time to time, we might stumble. We will, though, continue to hold ourselves to account.
Our Truth, Ta¯ Ma¯tou Pono is a Stuff project investigating the history of racism. In part one, we have explored our coverage of te ao Ma¯ori.
Today, we turn the spotlight on ourselves, and grapple with the truth that our journalism has often unfairly portrayed Ma¯ori, ranging from racist to blinkered.