Council complaint over CSC ad settled
A Conscious South Canterbury spokesperson has told the Advertising Standards Authority those behind the group “stand to lose more than they will gain by being identified”.
The Timaru District Council filed a complaint with the New Zealand Advertising Standards Authority following a two-page advertising spread, published under the banner of Conscious South Canterbury (CSC) on February 22, 2024.
The ad was published in the Timaru Courier newspaper, which is owned by Dunedin-based Allied Press. The twopage advertisement followed another ad published by CSC on February 1, 2024. That ad was published in The Timaru Herald and in the Timaru Courier.
In its complaint about the second ad, the council said it did not clearly state the identity of the advertiser saying “the group wished to remain anonymous”, therefore raising issues of truthful presentation and advocacy advertising.
The council’s complaint also said CSC “is unknown to the community, government and local media”.
In its findings, the authority said: “The complainant said the advertiser was not able to be contacted via the media agent listed in the advertisement.”
“It has no website, Facebook or direct contact details. Queries to the media agent for further information have been met with no reply.”
The council said Hels Ryan was listed as the contact on the advertising spreads which appeared in The Courier and The Timaru Herald on February 1.
“She was just the contact,” the council said, adding that it felt the lack of information provided, and the refusal to identify who was behind the group, meant the advert was in clear breach of the code.
In February, Ryan told The Timaru Herald she was not the one behind the advertising campaign, and was just involved as the contact. In her statement to the authority, on behalf of CSC, Ryan confirmed she had joined CSC and been appointed secretary. Ryan expressed shock and outrage at what she said were attempts to shut down discussion of issues that affected all Timaru ratepayers and “undermine democracy”.
“My contact details have been published as have contact details for CSC.”
She said the group had “made it clear” CSC was started by ratepayers and it took issue with the argument that it was “important for readers to know the identity” of those involved.
“The need for privacy for these people has been demonstrated by the witch hunt ensuing after the first advert’s release, and they stand to lose more than they will gain by being identified.”
Ryan said the identity of individuals was not material or relevant to advocacy principles. “What is relevant is that the purpose and position of the group is clear, it provides context for the consumer to see the advertise- ment is from an organisation of ratepayers, and to deny the publication of these articles based on individual membership not being published is absurd, and contrary to the advocacy principles and previous decisions of the complaints board.
“We believe the complaint by the Timaru District Council, which should be advocating for democracy, is frivolous, gratuitous and a cynical attempt to keep any factual information from the general public which disagrees with the story it is portraying.”
In its findings, the authority said advertisements had to be truthful, balanced and not misleading and advocacy advertising had to clearly state the identity and position of the advertiser.
“Opinion in support of the advertiser’s position must be clearly distinguishable from factual information. Factual information must be able to be substantiated.” The NZASA said the identity of the advertiser “must be obvious and easily recognised”.
“Where an advertiser is not well known, additional information such as a physical address, website address or phone number may be appropriate to include.”
It noted the advertiser had not originally been adequately identified because, at the time of publication, the contact details in the advertisement were for the media agent for CSC, not for the group itself. It noted that since the complaint had been made, the contact person for the advertiser had joined CSC and had been appointed its secretary. The authority agreed that as the identity and contact details for the advertiser were now correct, the complaint had been settled.