In the latest instalment of people outraged by things they clearly don’t understand, Aukaha News and a woman named Ellen Tamati have launched a social media tantrum over a billboard image used by Hobson’s Pledge in one of their campaign against Māori Wards.
The image in question? A stock photo. Legally purchased. Fully licensed. Totally above board.
Tamati, who is now the face of the “Vote No to Māori Wards” billboards, apparently didn't read the fine print when she (or the original photographer) submitted the image to a stock photo site. That’s how stock photography works. You get paid or you submit it willingly, then you lose control over how it's used. That includes political campaigns, advertising, or even a sandwich ad if someone wants.
Despite this, Aukaha News ran to Facebook in a panic, declaring Tamati was “just lost for words” and claimed “it’s not me” while literally looking at a photo of herself.
She and Aukaha seem to believe that because she personally supports Māori Wards, her image should never appear next to a view she disagrees with. That’s not how public licensing works, and it’s certainly not how logic works either.
Even more embarrassing is Aukaha’s request for their followers to start sending in photos of the billboards, like it’s some kind of criminal investigation rather than a completely lawful use of a stock image. This is what happens when activism gets filtered through Facebook outrage and not legal advice.
Meanwhile, Hobson’s Pledge responded with a calm and factual statement:
Tamati, who is now the face of the “Vote No to Māori Wards” billboards, apparently didn't read the fine print when she (or the original photographer) submitted the image to a stock photo site. That’s how stock photography works. You get paid or you submit it willingly, then you lose control over how it's used. That includes political campaigns, advertising, or even a sandwich ad if someone wants.
Despite this, Aukaha News ran to Facebook in a panic, declaring Tamati was “just lost for words” and claimed “it’s not me” while literally looking at a photo of herself.
She and Aukaha seem to believe that because she personally supports Māori Wards, her image should never appear next to a view she disagrees with. That’s not how public licensing works, and it’s certainly not how logic works either.
Even more embarrassing is Aukaha’s request for their followers to start sending in photos of the billboards, like it’s some kind of criminal investigation rather than a completely lawful use of a stock image. This is what happens when activism gets filtered through Facebook outrage and not legal advice.
Meanwhile, Hobson’s Pledge responded with a calm and factual statement:
“The image was legally purchased through a reputable stock photography provider.”
No hysteria, no hashtags, no cries of victimhood, just a factual explanation that shuts down the manufactured drama.
Of course, that didn’t stop the unhinged replies from rolling in. One shining example from the “proudly uneducated but always angry” crowd was this gem:
“fuk off.. youre gonna get sued ya racist motherf#kers”
Nothing screams moral authority like completely abandoning grammar, spelling, and self-respect in a public forum.
This saga isn't about misuse of images. It’s about Aukaha News and Ellen Tamati not understanding the very basics of image rights. Instead of asking how her image ended up on a stock site, they’ve chosen to play the victim and throw around wild accusations to stir up their Facebook following.
If you put your image into the public domain via a stock provider, you don’t get to pick and choose who uses it later. That's not oppression. That's the internet.
Maybe next time, Ellen Tamati and the team at Aukaha News should spend less time manufacturing outrage and more time reading the licensing terms.
Matua Kahurangi is just a bloke sharing thoughts on New Zealand and the world beyond. No fluff, just honest takes. He blogs on https://matuakahurangi.com/ where this article was sourced.
22 comments:
There is a difference between using someone's photograph in a work of art and saying they support something politically that they don't. In the latter case there is a misrepresentation. I often go tramping and have no problem with my photograph being taken as a person using National Parks. I'd hate to see my consent to that being used as a pretext for advertisements claiming I support the Greens.
At the same time, this story didn't deserve the media attention it received. The left wing parties are frequently guilty of doing the same thing, but there isn't the same uproar in the msm.
A little reality check; two can play that game, eh.
Excellent Billboard, very clever messaging.
Love your articles Matua - other than the fact that I agree with you on everything, your eloquence and style are fabulous. Please never stop writing!
Those two, Ellen Tamati and the team at Aukaha News, kicking up a fuss because they do not read the fine print, are as ‘thick as two bricks’. Speaks volumes for that lot. Watch the rest of the Māori lot kick up a fuss - the “grievance train” ………… Suck it up - all self created.
Well done Hobson’s Pledge 👍👍
Ha ha ha ha ha ha …..I’m still laughing. This is seriously funny.
It does seem a bit strange to use the photo of someone who "agrees" with Maori wards in a campaign "against" Maori wards. It might have been better to use a prominent part-Maori elder who supports Hobsons Pledge? Maybe they knew it would cause controversy? Anyway, I am against Maori wards as they are undemocratic.
Based on RNZ interview the legality may or may not be as simple as above. But what disappoints me is the obscurity of the advert. The message that maori wards are very self interested with little or no interest, or a counter interest, in the common good needs to hammered home to all voters Including recent immigrants, simple folk etc. .The associated general disruptive element, already extensively demonstrated, needs emphasis.The advert is far too obscure. How many citizens and especailly maori know exactly what mandate means in this context? For very very many the advert will be a riddle. If it is aimed at maori it is wasted; it will need far more pursuasive argument to dissuade them from maori wards. If aimed at others it is too obscure.
Read the fine print when you get your digital photos printed !
You are giving away lots of your copyright !
Did you see the images on Marxist News last night of abovenamed victim howling her eyes out - what, no sign of real tears? I'm with anonymous at 6.41am, can't stop laughing.
The fuss created over this has achieved exposure far in excess of what the campaign alone would have managed.
'Nothing screams moral authority like completely abandoning grammar, spelling, and self-respect in a public forum.'
You are mistaken, this just modern Te Reo.
P.T. Barnum once said, “There’s no such thing as bad publicity,” which is almost as good as Oscar Wilde’s version, who put it like this: “There’s only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about.”
Hobson's Pledge must be delighted that the MSM are bringing their billboards to the attention of a much wider audience. Much more bang for their advertising buck. This particular image may have gone, but there's plenty more where that came from. But whatever image is used, the message stays the same. And surely that's the important point.
This is hilarious.
The reaction it has sparked is like watching an animal seeing itself in a mirror for the first time.
A primal mixture of confusion and aggression.
Perhaps she could repay the money, cover the cost of print and reprint and replacement? But I guess her moral outrage does not extend to paying the price/cost for her beliefs.
I can't imagine any part Māori, even in agreement with Hobsons pledge values, having the balls to offer their services.
Particularly any sporting a chin scribble.
Didn't read the fine print on her contract ?
Her forebears didn't read the big print on the Treaty either ???
And more.... today... join the dots... violence again in civilised society....
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/auckland/police-probe-violent-brawl-at-auckland-girls-grammar-school-after-video-emerges/JAN7BNMM5ZH2HEAZQFKUJBKCIM
Well they had so little respect for the woman's 'Mana' that they didn't bother to find out who she was or what she thought; nor did they notice that the photo wasn't licensed for advertising purposes. Looks as if it's a Jordan and Ani mess from the Campaign Company, and Ani is already whingeing on X about the antics of Tamihere. No doubt she'll do a substack on the matter, and BV will publish it...
Feigned distress was a maori specialty. Early observers, Polak, Logan Campbell, EJ Wakefield were disgusted by the tears and snot at funerals. Along with much else repulsive the custom is becoming re established. If the public has an ounce of sense the wards will be rejected out of hand, in which case consideration of the extortion opportunities foregone will mean the tears may not be fake.
A tiny victory (or at least not complete defeat) on the maori takeover front. The Auckland Council has published the submissions and its response to the Waitakeres Ranges Heritage Area Deed of Acknowledgement proposal. Foolishly (or possibly purposely with current bias) Council allowed maori to initiate the action, forcing a defensive action by informed members of the public. A 50/50 maori committee was to determine a course of action. After extensive criticism of the co governance (effectively maori control) the composition has been revised to 5:6! Of course maori will easily intimidate one or two to cooperate. To view, on Council website go to Have Your Say. Then Topics Can Have Say find the WRHADA April. Start reading from Vol 3 backwards. 1606 may interest..... Council tends to treat the submissions as a vote rather than a source of ideas. Maori have a huge submissions advantage because of coordination through their insurgency communications netwok and vast number of Maori Studies students and others to swamp submissions.
Meanwhile a guy up North, cleaning his defaced billboard gets accused of defacing the TPM billboard, and now his family has been threatened with the bash. Seems that the accusation removed and no apology but the damage is done.
Any co governance arrangements should always be a ratio of 5:1, reflecting ratio of Maori population to non Maori. Basic maths really
Post a Comment
Thanks for engaging in the debate!
Because this is a public forum, we will only publish comments that are respectful and do NOT contain links to other sites. We appreciate your cooperation.