AA Insurance appoints chief financial officer. 

Detected Manipulations & Suggested Changes

Biased language

Use of positive or value-laden wording that implicitly promotes one side without presenting neutral or balanced phrasing.

Examples include: - "bringing extensive experience in financial leadership, governance, and strategic transformation across some of New Zealand’s most complex organisations." - "where he oversaw significant revenue and asset portfolios" - "strong emphasis on building an engaged and high-performing team culture." - "We are delighted to welcome Peter to AA Insurance. His depth of experience ... will be a valuable addition to the great work already under way and will support our continued focus on delivering outstanding outcomes for our customers, partners, and communities." - "AA Insurance has a strong reputation, a clear purpose, and an impressive track record of performance." These phrases present the subject in a uniformly positive light, without any neutral counterbalance or independent verification.

5 suggestions

Replace evaluative adjectives with neutral descriptions, e.g., change "bringing extensive experience" to "bringing more than X years of experience in financial leadership, governance, and strategic transformation."

Quantify or specify claims where possible, e.g., instead of "some of New Zealand’s most complex organisations," specify the organisations and what makes them complex (size, budget, regulatory environment) or omit the evaluative term.

Change "strong emphasis on building an engaged and high-performing team culture" to a more neutral formulation such as "where he led initiatives aimed at improving staff engagement and performance metrics."

For quotes from the CEO, clearly frame them as promotional statements and, if aiming for higher objectivity, add context such as: "In a statement, AA Insurance chief executive Michelle James described the appointment positively, saying..."

For claims like "strong reputation" and "impressive track record of performance," either provide supporting data (e.g., customer satisfaction scores, financial results) or rephrase as opinion: "Gudsell described AA Insurance as having a strong reputation and a clear purpose."

Unbalanced reporting

Presenting only one side or perspective, especially in a way that is uniformly positive, without acknowledging any neutral or critical viewpoints.

The article exclusively presents AA Insurance’s and Peter Gudsell’s perspectives and achievements. It includes only positive statements about his background and the company: - Career history is framed only in terms of success and leadership ("played a key role in resolving longstanding insurance matters"). - The CEO and Gudsell are quoted at length with no alternative or contextual perspectives (e.g., from industry analysts, staff, or customers). - There is no discussion of potential challenges, risks, or controversies related to the appointment. This is typical of supplied corporate content but still constitutes an imbalance in perspectives.

4 suggestions

Add neutral context about the role and company, such as current financial or market conditions that might shape the CFO’s priorities, without framing them as purely positive.

Include, where relevant, independent commentary (e.g., from an industry analyst) that provides context on the appointment, even if it is neutral rather than critical.

Mention any known challenges the company faces that the new CFO will need to address (e.g., regulatory changes, market competition), framed factually rather than negatively.

Clarify the nature of the content more prominently at the beginning (not only at the end), e.g., "This is supplied corporate content from AA Insurance" to signal to readers that it is essentially a press release and not a balanced news investigation.

Appeal to authority

Using positions, titles, or institutional prestige to imply that a claim is valid or desirable without providing substantive evidence.

The article leans on institutional roles and reputations to imply quality and success: - Listing roles such as "Group CFO at Auckland Council," "CFO at the University of Auckland," and senior roles at "Christchurch City Council" is factual, but combined with phrases like "played a key role in resolving longstanding insurance matters" and "impressive track record of performance" it implicitly suggests that the appointment is unquestionably positive because of these prestigious positions. - The CEO’s praise is presented without any balancing information or evidence beyond her authority as chief executive.

3 suggestions

Separate factual role descriptions from evaluative implications, e.g., "He previously served as Group CFO at Auckland Council and CFO at the University of Auckland" without adding implied judgments about success unless supported by data.

Where success is implied (e.g., "played a key role in resolving longstanding insurance matters"), briefly describe the outcomes in neutral, verifiable terms (e.g., "helped negotiate settlements that reduced outstanding claims by X%"), or attribute the evaluation clearly: "According to AA Insurance, he played a key role..."

Frame CEO statements explicitly as opinions: "Michelle James said she believes his experience will be a valuable addition..." rather than presenting them as implicit fact.

Oversimplification

Presenting complex situations or histories in a simplified, uniformly positive way that omits nuance.

The description of Gudsell’s role at Christchurch City Council states he "played a key role in resolving longstanding insurance matters following the Canterbury earthquakes" without acknowledging the complexity, duration, or any controversies associated with post-earthquake insurance settlements. This compresses a complex, multi-stakeholder process into a single positive achievement.

3 suggestions

Add brief context acknowledging complexity, e.g., "He held senior finance leadership roles at Christchurch City Council, contributing to efforts to resolve longstanding insurance matters following the Canterbury earthquakes, a process involving multiple insurers, regulators, and community stakeholders."

Avoid implying that one individual’s role was solely decisive unless this is supported by evidence; use more measured language such as "contributed to" or "was involved in" rather than "played a key role" if the latter cannot be substantiated.

If space allows, note that outcomes involved trade-offs or were part of broader institutional efforts, to avoid implying a simple, one-person solution to a complex issue.