Episode description
Episode description
What was in the infamous Hobson's Pledge advertisement in the Herlad that has sparked outrage and boycotts?
The New Zealand Herald and its publisher NZME hit a nerve last week, publishing an advertisement from Hobson's Pledge that critics have called 'misleading', factually incorrect, and racist.
The full front-page wrap urged readers to sign a petition to 'Restore the Foreshore and Seabed to Public Ownership'.
It prompted a call out from the Māori Journalist's association, Kawea Te Rongo, a boycott from Te Pāti Māori, Iwi Radio severing its ties and an open letter signed by 170 lawyers refuting the ad's claims.
Plans for a second ad were scrapped by NZME, which promised a review into its advertising policies - sparking more fury from Hobson's Pledge spokesman Don Brash, and the Free Speech Union.
But was the outcry against the ad justified?
Today The Detail speaks to a former editor-in-chief of The Herald, and Tumuaki Wāhine - vice-president - of the Māori Law Society to find out.
At the centre of the debate is a claim that there are applications from iwi, hapu and whanau for customary marine titles of nearly all the New Zealand coast under MACA - the Marine and Coastal Area Act.
That part is true.
But what's not true is that these would limit public access to the beaches.
Natalie Coates is the Tumuaki Wāhine for Te Hunga Rōia Māori o Aotearoa - the Māori Law Society - and one of 170 lawyers who penned an open letter laying out why the ad was wrong and racist.
"I think it's helpful to go through line by line, but also overall it's important to make sure you look at the ad in its whole and how it creates an impression," she says.
The front paged was titled 'restore the foreshore and seabed to public ownership'. Public ownership was highlighted in red.
This is the first falsehood, because as Coates explains, the majority of the foreshore and seabed hasn't historically been publicly owned.
"It's not owned by anybody currently, except for the areas of foreshore that are currently in mainly non-Māori private ownership actually … so, the idea of restoration is false," she explains.
Coates adds that the impression given by lines like 'restore public ownership' and 'iwi are going to get title' is that Māori will come to own this area, and that simplistic message misses the nuances of the true meaning…