The article in the Post 14/9/25 is titled ‘ Wayne Brown strengthens lead, new poll shows.’ Even the heading is false. “It seriously misleads voters and benefits ex Mayor Wayne ‘Bandaid’ Brown”. Says Ted Johnston BSc BA LLB who has two degrees in Psychology which includes statistical analysis. “There is a reason for the phrase ‘ Lies , damned lies and statistics’”. Johnston states.

-Brown hasn’t strengthened his lead , and

- the poll is not new.

The poll was supposedly carried out on 11/7/25 to 15/7/25 , this was a week after nominations opened on 5/7/25, 2 weeks before nominations closed and the candidates were announced on 1/8/25. It was an initial baseline first poll. It set a starting point.

This poll was carried out before the campaigns had started for the election and even before the candidates had even been officially named, It was the first one, so could not strengthen nor change as there were no possible previous polls.

Secondly it is not new as it is 2 months old. Plus the entire election campaign period is only 2 and a half months long.

Of further concern is that all the candidates are named. I have never seen all candidates having their applications in during the first week of a month-long nomination period. Nor is it sensible to carry out a poll one week into nominations opening, and 3 weeks to go as the candidates may change. While not impossible, it is highly suspicious and needs to be investigated as it may point to a fake poll.

Further claiming that Brown’s opposition candidates are languishing in single figures on September 14 based on a poll taken 2 months earlier on 17 July is completely ridiculous and obviously incorrect.

Then the news item states Brown has opened up a commanding lead. That was the initial starting lead so he cannot open up more from it. That is false.

They could have said he started with a commanding lead. However using the word ‘new’ portrays a current poll of the situation in early September.

Then we see another fake claim that the 2 month old poll is new. The timing of polls is always of the essence.

The incumbent Mayor Brown had a starting advantage. The challengers were initially less well known, however the campaigns are now well underway with news media, social media and public appearances which have made huge changes. That is what campaigns do.

Then we note that the poll was commissioned by Brown. So he had the ability to decide if and when to release it. This is almost certainly not the only one as he would have done follow-ups with his resources.

The fact ex-Mayor Brown has released this ridiculously aged poll can only reasonably be that the other more recent ones are very much worse for him.

Then we notice this falsely claimed new poll was used to bolster Brown’s position, by stating it showed off public support despite controversies over his leadership style, steep rates rises and criticism of his combative approach. How? These controversies and criticism occurred months after the poll?

Brown used his own poll last election (which only was for men over 60 who owned houses), and as I remember only came second in that, yet it was enough to push him into the favourite position when 2 other major candidates floundered. Maybe he thinks a carefully selected poll can do it again.

He is obviously desperate as he has turned up to candidate meetings twice in 3 days while never appearing previously. It is reasonable to believe his real polls are telling him he will lose as campaigns like mine gain momentum and support.

Mainstream news media falsely reporting polls can change entire elections. People often vote according to what others do, and so news media telling people that a majority of voters will vote for a particular candidate ( here Brown) will raise that candidates vote.

It becomes a self fulfilling prophecy which is why polls have to be policed. In NZ it is done by RANZ. (The Research Association of NZ ). They use the NZ Political Polling code.

From the code we note why policing of polls is so important.

‘ The development of the code is in recognition of the fact that reporting of polls can have an impact on how people vote.

Inaccurate polls or polls that are reported inaccurately can impact on voting attitudes and behaviours and thus influence the democratic process’

Brown’s private pollster ‘Freshwater Strategy’ is apparently an Australian pollster so is not necessarily subject to NZ quality controls by RANZ. So where is a copy of the poll to check for bias, and ensure it’s credibility? To check the questions and who was polled where and when? To check internal and external bias? Often with these private polls they are not released. That being the case we cannot trust them, as they are not verifiable. The media should therefore not publish them.

This scandal highlights the need for stronger laws against electoral fraud by news media and where appropriate candidates and pollsters, for misleading voters by falsely representing polls, since polls so powerfully influence voters.

This is the tip of the iceberg of pro-Brown media bias in the current Auckland Mayoralty election and draws into question Brown’s credibility and fitness to be Mayor, as well as the urgent need for strong legislative controls to prevent Media bias in elections.

© Scoop Media