In a post on the Daily Blog website, the waitress said she was misled by the NZ Herald reporter, and believed she was in fact speaking to a public relations consultant who was a friend of the cafe's owners.
NZ Herald editor Shayne Currie has responded, issuing a statement about how the story was reported (full statement below).
Mr Currie said the cafe owners told him yesterday afternoon they had initially thought the reporter was working on a statement to go to all media, along with a photograph.
"Given the situation, I wanted to absolutely ensure they knew this interview and photograph were for the Herald. To further ease any concerns, we took the very rare step of agreeing Rachel should run the quotes past the parties before publication," Mr Currie said.
"By then, no one was in any doubt that the article, quotes and photograph would be appearing in the Herald."
Earlier, experts said the hair-pulling scandal had hurt Mr Key's credibility and could land him in legal hot water, experts say.
Mr Key apologised after waitress Amanda Bailey said in an anonymous blog post that Mr Key pulled her hair numerous times when visiting the cafe where she worked.
Mr Key told media yesterday he was "horsing around" with staff at the cafe, but in hindsight his actions were "inappropriate".
Opposition MPs have slammed Mr Key's behaviour towards Miss Bailey as childish and an abuse of power.
Political scientist Dr Bryce Edwards said the incident would undermine Mr Key's ability to respond to bad behaviour from his colleagues.
Mr Key's National Party colleagues would give him a lot of slack but the weirdness of the ponytail-pulling was problematic, he said.
"It really relates to his main electoral asset of being down-to-earth, relaxed, jokey John Key. That has been a winning formula."
Dr Edwards said Mr Key built his brand on being "almost an anti-politician" rather than a staid statesman but whenever in future Mr Key was seen to be joking, irreverent, or earthy, many New Zealanders would instantly recall the ponytail incident.
The incident had also damaged Mr Key's moral authority among colleagues and scope for keeping his own MPs focussed and away from embarrassing incidents, Dr Edwards said.
Meanwhile, Ms Bailey could take civil proceedings against Mr Key over the hair-pulling episodes, University of Auckland law professor Bill Hodge said.
Mr Key could also be investigated for common assault for "hostile touching" if police received a complaint, he said.
Auckland University criminology and sociology lecturer Dr Ronald Kramer said Mr Key's unwanted physical actions put the vulnerable waitress in a powerless position where she was unable to "fight back".
"You have to remember this is an older white male with a lot of power doing something like this to a woman who is presumably young, in a difficult job, and presumably on low pay."
Dr Kramer said people in powerful positions such as the prime minister's often did not think about how their actions affected others.
Employment law expert Susan Hornsby-Geluk said if an employer was aware of unwanted physical attention towards one of its workers and failed to act, they could also potentially face a claim of unjustified disadvantage.
Women's rights campaigner and former National Party MP Marilyn Waring told Radio New Zealand that she believed Mr Key had broken the law.
"I'm getting tired of it being called anything but illegal," she said.
"The young woman said she felt powerless and tormented and she was reduced to tears."
Serial litigant Graham McCready said the New Zealand Private Prosecution Service will file a complaint against Mr Key under Section 62 of the Human Rights Act for bullying of a sexual nature in the work place.
The National Council of Women has sent an open letter to Mr Key rebuking him for his apology to Ms Bailey.
While he did apologise to her, he minimised his actions when he explained he was just "horsing around", the council said.
"You probably think that you've never touched someone in such a way before. However, this incident shows that you have crossed the line," the letter said.
National Council of Women chief executive Sue McCabe told RNZ that Mr Key used his apology to portray the waitress as uptight and oversensitive.
Opposition MPs have also waded into the controversy.
New Zealand First deputy leader Tracey Martin told RNZ that pulling a woman's hair was unacceptable behaviour from anyone, let alone the leader of a country.
"If he doesn't understand where people's personal boundaries lie, we've got some rather serious problems I think. It's childish behaviour."
Labour's deputy leader Annette King told RNZ Mr Key abused his power and had a moment similar to former Cera chief executive Roger Sutton.
"Roger Sutton said that he was just a friendly guy, that he just used to put his arms around people, that he didn't mean any harm and we know what happened to Roger Sutton, he lost his job."
But Cabinet Minister Jo Goodhew supported Mr Key.
"I'm sure that he regrets making this woman uncomfortable, so he has apologised," she told RNZ.
Human Rights Commissioner Jackie Blue issued a statement saying it was never okay to touch someone without their permission.
"There are no exceptions."
Mr Key is due to give a speech tonight at the peace conference along with Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott and the president of Turkey, Recep Tayyip Erdogan.
Herald statement
Shayne Currie, Editor of NZ Herald has released a statement on how the story was reported:
Rachel Glucina approached the Hip Group yesterday, after The Daily Blog broke the story. She knows the Hip Group owners personally.
Glucina wanted to follow-up The Daily Blog post and urged the couple to front-foot the issue.
She spoke to the couple and the waitress over the telephone. Regardless of any confusion over the initial approach, all three agreed they wanted to make a public statement.
They also agreed to pose for a photograph and a Herald photographer was dispatched. They were told by the photographer that the photo would be appearing in the Herald.
Herald editor Shayne Currie also spoke to the owners of the Hip Group yesterday afternoon following a call from a PR firm that had already been helping them.
"When I spoke to the owners, they told me they had initially thought Rachel was working on a statement to go to all media, along with the photograph.
"Given the situation, I wanted to absolutely ensure they knew this interview and photograph were for the Herald. To further ease any concerns, we took the very rare step of agreeing Rachel should run the quotes past the parties before publication.
"By then, no one was in any doubt that the article, quotes and photograph would be appearing in the Herald."
