Don't shoot the messenger... or maybe...

I read Duranti's "Intentions, language, and social action in a Samoan context," and I was kind of surprised by his number 4 example (page 20). He provides an example in which "The orator is...reprimanded for having said something that was at a later point contradicted by the chief Savea" (21).

How can it be the orator's fault if a situation changes later?

Maybe this rule simply tries to minimize hasty statements and encourage speakers to carefully think through the possible effects of what they are about to say.

Even so, what does "get reprimanded" mean? Are there potentially severe consequences when the situation changes after the speaker speaks?

Also, unlike our common saying "don't shoot the messenger," Duranti notes that "an orator can be held responsible for having announced something on behalf of a higher ranking matai" and that "The orator's own understanding of the events or his personal motivations may well be irrelevant" (16). This example provides an interesting comparative context between the American perspective on the messenger's situation and Samoan perspective.