Whakaata Māori CEO Shane Taurima. Photo / Supplied
The chief executive of Whakaata Māori (Māori Television) has been cleared in a new report of political interference or undermining editorial integrity after the removal of an online news article following a complaint from Te Pāti Māori.
But the report also reveals an untidy set of events within the media business as it dealt with the complaint - including the director of news and current affairs allegedly being upset about the way her chief executive, Shane Taurima, had managed the matter, saying in a text message to the reporter that she was “pissed at his editorial interference”.
Meanwhile, the reporter who resigned over the way the story was handled is unhappy with the report findings.
The report, commissioned by the Whakaata Maori board, investigated the actions of Taurima and senior management after Te Pāti Māori president John Tamihere complained about an article published on the teaonews.co.nz website on November 9.
The article, by journalist Will Trafford, focused on the operation of a polling booth at Manurewa Marae at the general election and the Electoral Commission confirming that it had received complaints.
The article highlighted Te Pāti Māori candidate Takutai Tarsh Kemp - who won the Māori seat of Tāmaki Makarau by just four votes - was the CEO of Manurewa Marae.
The article was removed from Whakaata Māori’s website after Tamihere complained to Taurima.
A follow-up opinion column by Tamihere took issue with the article, claiming it was fake.
Whakaata Māori said the article was factually correct but claimed it failed “to seek a right of response”, which meant it “did not uphold editorial standards of balance”.
Trafford resigned from Whakaata Māori over the way the complaint was handled.
His resignation letter - which was later leaked to newsroom staff - raised serious allegations about the actions of Taurima, a former Te Pāti Māori candidate in 2017.
However, the investigation by lawyer Nura Taefi has cleared Taurima of any wrongdoing.
Her report, a redacted version of which has been released, found there was no evidence of “political interference or a misappropriation of Whakaata Māori’s platform for the political purpose of advancing the interests of Te Pāti Māori”.
There was also no evidence of a “breach of editorial independence protocols” or a conflict of interest.
Nor did Taurima undermine the journalistic integrity and independence of Whakaata Māori, according to the report.
While the report clears Taurima of political interference, it outlines a sequence of events involving himself and two other senior managers - the director of news and current affairs Wena Harawira and the director of content Maramena Roderick.
The report says Taurima made some initial inquiries after receiving Tamihere’s complaint, before handing responsibility for it to Roderick later that day.
“It was appropriate for Mr Taurima to respond to Mr Tamihere directly in the first instance and conduct preliminary enquiries. This was in keeping with his role as Kaihautū and Editor-in-Chief to manage editorial risk,” says the report.
After Tamihere’s complaint, Taurima called Harawira who had allegedly told him comment had been sought from Te Pāti Māori before publication of the article - however, this was later found to not be the case.
Roderick spent about two hours reviewing the article, and background information, including communicating with Harawira.
The report says Roderick’s review was independent and concluded that the article did not uphold editorial standards of balance.
“I agree with her view. Ms Roderick made the decision to remove the article and to publish a follow-up article. There is no evidence Mr Taurima was involved in these decisions.”
The report reveals that following the publication of a retraction, Harawira sent Trafford a text message about Taurima saying she was “pissed at his editorial interference”.
“She believes that this may be the reason Mr Trafford has made allegations of political interference,” says the report.
“Ms Harawira says she sent the message because at the time she felt that Mr Taurima should have left her and Mr Trafford to manage the situation.
“She says she made the comment because she perceived that the personal relationship between Mr Taurima and Mr Tamihere had influenced the way in which he dealt with the matter.
“She says that in retrospect she should not have made that comment, and that she can understand why Mr Taurima dealt with the matter directly.”
Trafford is unhappy with the report’s findings and says he should have been interviewed.
According to her report, Taefi said she had tried to interview Trafford, starting with messages on November 24 and another on November 28. On November 29, she said, he told her he had to decide whether he would participate.
After the Herald revealed details of the case last weekend, Trafford told Taefi on Monday that he would participate and send her necessary information by December 25.
She said she told him on Tuesday that the draft report was complete but that she could give him three working days to respond to a confidential copy or he could provide information or be interviewed.
“Mr Trafford responded the same day, advising that this timeframe was not suitable for him, and questioning the impartiality of the process. He stated that ‘given these circumstances, I cannot in good conscience participate further. I won’t be part of what appears a mockery of justice’.
“I responded to Mr Trafford’s email immediately, assuring him that I was keen to have his input and had sought this from the outset. I asked him whether he could respond in a timeframe that was longer than three days but shorter than 25 December 2023.
“I also asked if he was willing to make himself available for an interview and offered to schedule this at a time that was convenient to him. Mr Trafford did not reply. I sent him a further email on 13 December 2023, asking him to reply to me by 12pm on 14 December 2023 or I would presume he did not wish to participate and I would release my final report.
“At 11.43am on 14 December 2023, Mr Trafford emailed me to say he was concerned that I was releasing a report without his critical perspective. I responded to reiterate I wanted his input and that I was willing to meet him halfway. I asked whether he was willing to meet with me and made a request for a phone call. He did not respond prior to the release of this report at 12.30pm.”
In a lengthy statement to Media Insider, Trafford said he believed Whakaata Māori leadership was “adept at rejecting almost any fact you throw at them”.
He said he was “deeply troubled by the closure of the investigation without including my statement or evidence”.
“While Whakaata Māori admitting the factual accuracy of my story is a step forward, the inquiry’s failure to consider my evidence remains a glaring issue.
“I believe truth flows, like an awa [river], and I look forward to how this story develops in the coming weeks and months.
“Throughout this ordeal, I’ve faced direct threats to my job, defamation of my character and journalistic work, online attacks, invasive demands for my sources, and a stream of falsehoods from the organisation’s leadership.
“Despite these challenges, I have consistently strived to embody Whakaata Māori’s founding principles: Kia Tika, Kia Pono, Kia Aroha, Kia Māori, representing integrity, honesty and compassion.
“This report only reaffirms my belief that Whakaata Māori leadership do not share my values, offering some solace that my decision to resign was the correct course of action.”
Agency boss: 'NZ media market needs to reinvent itself'.