‘We’re struggling with the decision’: Warehouse on ComCom charges. 

Detected Manipulations & Suggested Changes

Omission of key information

Leaving out important contextual details that are necessary for readers to fully understand the issue.

The headline and opening lines reference ‘criminal charges filed against Noel Leeming’ and that the CEO ‘has opened up about the criminal charges’ and ‘offered NBR a status update on an ongoing investigation regarding Noel Leeming’, but the visible article text provides no information about: - What the specific charges are - What conduct is alleged - The Commerce Commission’s (ComCom’s) position or statements - Any legal or consumer context This creates a situation where a serious allegation is mentioned but not explained in the accessible portion of the article.

3 suggestions

Add a concise summary of the charges in the visible portion, e.g.: ‘The Commerce Commission has laid charges alleging that Noel Leeming misled customers about their rights under the Consumer Guarantees Act (CGA). Noel Leeming denies the allegations.’

Include at least one sentence summarising ComCom’s position or a public statement, e.g.: ‘The Commerce Commission says the charges relate to representations made to customers between [years].’

Clarify the procedural status of the case (e.g., ‘The case is before the District Court and no findings have been made’), to avoid implying guilt or resolution where none exists.

Sensationalism / Misleading or incomplete headline

Using emotionally charged or dramatic wording in the headline that may overstate or distort what is actually presented in the accessible content.

Headline: ‘We’re struggling with the decision’: Warehouse on ComCom charges. The quote ‘We’re struggling with the decision’ is presented without context in the visible text. Readers are not told what decision is being struggled with (e.g., whether to plead, to settle, to appeal, to change practices, etc.). Combined with the mention of ‘criminal charges’, this can create a more dramatic impression than the sparse factual content supports.

3 suggestions

Clarify the decision in the headline or subheading, e.g.: ‘We’re struggling with the decision on whether to [settle/fight the charges]’: Warehouse on ComCom case.

Ensure the visible text includes at least one sentence explaining the quote, e.g.: ‘Stirton said the company was still weighing whether to contest the charges in court or seek a settlement.’

Avoid using a decontextualised emotional quote as the main hook; pair it with a factual descriptor of the situation.

Unbalanced reporting

Presenting one side’s perspective while giving little or no space to other relevant perspectives.

The visible text only mentions The Warehouse Group and its CEO’s willingness to ‘defend its case’ and that he ‘has opened up’ and ‘offered NBR a status update’. There is no mention of ComCom’s view, consumer advocates, or any independent legal or market context. While this may be due to the paywall truncation, the accessible portion is effectively one-sided.

3 suggestions

Include at least one sentence summarising ComCom’s position or a public statement, even in the teaser, e.g.: ‘The Commerce Commission alleges that Noel Leeming misled customers about their rights, a claim the company disputes.’

Add a brief neutral line about the broader context, e.g.: ‘The case is part of a wider enforcement focus on retailers’ compliance with consumer law.’

If space is limited, explicitly signal that other perspectives are covered behind the paywall, e.g.: ‘The full article includes the Commerce Commission’s response and legal experts’ views on the case.’