Media Insider: Advertising Standards Authority rules on complaints about three Hobson’s Pledge advertisements

Provided those conditions were met, said the ASA, then freedom of expression and opinion had to be taken into account, under the Bill of Rights.

The lengthiest complaint came over the ad in the Post on October 1.

“My complaint is not that Hobson’s Pledge should be prevented from criticising Te Pāti Māori, Labour, or a potential political arrangement between those parties,” said the complainant.

“Rather, my concern is with the specific racialised framing and imagery chosen to communicate that political message, and the overall consumer takeout created by the advertisement.”

Referring to the image of Hipkins emerging from the clothing of Waititi, the complainant said the “clear political proposition” appeared to be that Labour could be influenced or controlled by Te Pāti Māori after the election.

“My concern is that this proposition is communicated not through criticism of particular policies or political positions, but through a deliberately provocative visual treatment centred on a Māori political figure and Te Pāti Māori.

“I recognise that political identity is distinct from race and that criticism of Te Pāti Māori is not inherently criticism of Māori. However, the advertisement itself deliberately uses culturally and ethnically salient imagery as a central part of its message.”

The complainant said that given New Zealand’s “social context and the prominence of the full-page newspaper placement, I believe the advertisement is likely to demean, provoke hostility or reinforce harmful racial attitudes”.

The ASA chair ruled the image and the wording in the election advertisement expressed a political opinion from Hobson’s Pledge.

“... the issues raised by the complainant about offence, harm, social responsibility and truthful presentation did not meet the threshold to breach the Advertising Standards Code.”

Because the chair ruled no further action was necessary, Hobson’s Pledge was not approached by the ASA about the complaint.

On its website, Hobson’s Pledge says, “Our campaigns focus on practical issues where equality, fairness and democratic accountability are at stake. We aim to inform, engage and give New Zealanders a constructive way to participate in public debate.”

The complainant in this case said the billboard ad, featuring Hipkins, Jackson and Waititi, breached rules around truthful presentation.

“With the use of images of two Māori politicians from the left bloc, the ad claims that voting for Labour (or TPM) would lead to Māori having ‘control’ (with an implication of unfair/unjustified control) of Parliament, and that this would lead to division.

“Both of these claims are untrue and cannot be substantiated, therefore breaching rule 2(b) [of the Advertising Standards Code].

“With the wording and images used, this ad implies that it is universally accepted that Māori voices lead to division, which is also untrue and breaches rule 2(b).

“This claim is also discriminatory based on cultural background, which breaches rule 1(c). It promotes a negative and untrue view that Māori cause division within New Zealand, and that promoting Māori voices or causes is unfair or undemocratic.”

The ASA’s complaints board chair ruled that the image and the wording expressed a political opinion from Hobson’s Pledge.

“... the issues raised by the complainant about discrimination, social responsibility and truthful presentation did not meet the threshold to breach the Advertising Standards Code.”

The complainant in this case said they did not know if they had “the right words to describe this race-baiting ad shown to my teenagers on this app”.

“I feel it is targeting them to persuade their views before they are even able to vote. It portrays Māori as dangerous and threatening. As if they can put party leaders in their pocket and control other politicians and their views.

“I also feel it also doesn’t live up to the standards of decency the political campaigning in New Zealand should follow. I also feel they have worded it vaguely only so they can skirt the advertising complaints process.”

Like the findings in the other two complaints, the ASA chair said the image and wording expressed a political opinion from Hobson’s Pledge.

Issues raised by the complainant about offence and social responsibility did not meet the threshold to breach the code.

In all three findings, the complaints board chair said that under the Advertising Standards Code, paid election advertisements were not only “acceptable but encouraged, as they are an essential and desirable part of the functioning of a democratic society”.

“It is important that political advertisers can freely communicate their views so that voters can decide how they want to vote in the upcoming election.

“Under Rule 2(e) of the Advertising Standards Code, election advertising must 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.

“Provided the requirements of Rule 2(e) are met, the Advertising Standards Code is applied to election advertising in a way that takes into account the protections for freedom of expression and opinion in the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 (BORA).”

Last year, a Hobson’s Pledge billboard featuring a Rotorua kuia was removed after her family complained that her photo had been used in an unauthorised manner.

The family had said the stock photo was to be used for editorial purposes only, not commercial.

Hobson’s Pledge said it was aware the woman had expressed distress.

“The image was legally purchased through a reputable stock photography provider, and all rights to use it in public-facing materials were secured.”

Hobson’s Pledge said it had asked the billboard company to remove the advertisement immediately once it realised the impact on the woman.

The ASA ruled the complaint had been settled after the advertisement was removed.

In 2024, a Hobson’s Pledge foreshore and seabed ad that ran on the front page of the NZ Herald was deemed to be misleading and breached the advertising code.

The ASA received 672 complaints about the ad and accepted 655 complaints to go to its complaints board.

Editor-at-Large Shayne Currie is one of New Zealand’s most experienced senior journalists and media leaders. He has held executive and senior editorial roles at NZME including Managing Editor, NZ Herald Editor and Herald on Sunday Editor and has a small shareholding in NZME.