The Platform owner and host Sean Plunket. Photo \/ File<\/p>\n
On The Platform on Wednesday, Plunket heavily criticised the BSA.<\/p>\n
\u201cThis is the biggest threat to The Platform and its ongoing survival and the freedom of speech that we were set up to encourage. This is the Orwellian bureaucrats coming for us. <\/p>\n
\u201cI can lie down, I can walk away, or I can fight, but if I fight, it is going to be difficult and tough. It\u2019s a hill I\u2019m prepared to die on.\u201d<\/p>\n
He sought his audience\u2019s views on releasing the documents \u201cbecause if I do, we\u2019re going to war\u201d.<\/p>\n
A few minutes later, he read out from the documents.<\/p>\n
The BSA, meanwhile, has explained its position in a response to Herald questions.<\/p>\n
\u201cYes, we are aware of the ramifications of this decision,\u201d said chief executive Stacey Wood.<\/p>\n
NZ First leader Winston Peters said the BSA\u2019s position was \u201coutrageous\u201d.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhy does the Broadcasting Standards Authority think they can make up their own rules in secret meetings to act like some Soviet era stasi,\u201d he said on social media.<\/p>\n
NZ First leader Winston Peters. Photo \/ VNP<\/p>\n
\u201cThe blatant overreach on display by the BSA now dictating they can censor and monitor anything transmitted on the internet is highly concerning. Can the BSA please tell us what the legal basis is for their recent outrageous action.\u201d<\/p>\n
Media and Communications Minister Paul Goldsmith said in a statement to the Herald: \u201cAs Minister, I cannot comment on operational matters or individual cases. However, my officials will be keeping me updated due to the potential impacts on media regulation.\u201d<\/p>\n
The complaint<\/p>\n
On July 22, Punket referred to tikanga M\u0101ori as \u201cmumbo jumbo\u201d as he commented on a new kaupapa M\u0101ori proposal from Fire and Emergency NZ.<\/p>\n
On July 31, complainant Richard Fanselow wrote to The Platform: \u201cDefinition of racist – a definition of a racist is someone who spends a disproportionate amount of time focusing on just one racial group, mainly to emphasise negative characteristics.<\/p>\n
\u201cSo that\u2019s pretty much a definition of The Platform and its male front people, isn\u2019t it? Making this a probably futile exercise, but one the [Broadcasting Standards] Authority requires. That is to invite comment from the media outlet involved before lodging a complaint with the authority. So that\u2019s what I am doing here. <\/p>\n
\u201cMy complaint is about Mr Plunket so casually referring to all the customs and beliefs of M\u0101ori – tikanga – as mumbo jumbo – a term with a historic racist beginning. <\/p>\n
\u201cCasually, as if such a description is of no consequence – it\u2019s what most people think. It is what Mr Plunket may think – coming as it did in the middle of his sarcastic, scornful references to a M\u0101ori issue, complete with his totally childish, exaggerated and drawn-out pronunciations of M\u0101ori words.\u201d<\/p>\n
Plunket responded to Fanselow the next day: \u201cYou plonker. We aren\u2019t subject to the Broadcasting Standards Authority.\u201d<\/p>\n
Fanselow then took the matter to the authority, asking it if Plunket was correct. \u201cIs there any kind of remedy for such obviously racist talk?\u201d<\/p>\n
The BSA\u2019s provisional decision<\/p>\n
In a \u201cprovisional interlocutory decision\u201d, marked \u201cnot for publication\u201d, the authority said it had accepted jurisdiction \u201con the basis the transmission of the programme met the Broadcasting Act\u2019s definition of \u2018broadcasting\u2019.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cTaking a purposive approach to the Act, which is designed to provide for the maintenance of programme standards in New Zealand broadcasting, the Act is appropriately seen as capturing such modern forms of broadcasting. <\/p>\n
\u201cAs there is currently no code of broadcasting standards specifically addressing the online broadcasting context, the complaint will be considered with a view to determining the broadcaster\u2019s compliance with its obligations under section 4 of the Act.\u201d<\/p>\n
However, that decision seems to fly in the face of years of debate and discussion in which Governments have looked at media regulation in New Zealand – and which agency, if any, covers certain online content. <\/p>\n
The regulation and oversight of standards of New Zealand content is currently a mix of full regulation (broadcasting), industry self-regulation (the professional news media) and little to no regulation (social media). In addition, there are a broad range of laws that govern this area.<\/p>\n
Until now, the BSA has been focused on traditional television and radio networks – and what they have broadcast on air (including later online content).<\/p>\n
The BSA asked Plunket for submissions on its provisional decision by November 12.<\/p>\n
\u201cYou\u2019ve reached a provisional decision without talking to me, and now, post-factual, you want me to comment on it?\u201d Plunket said to his audience.<\/p>\n
\u201cI\u2019m not playing that game. You don\u2019t have authority over me.\u201d<\/p>\n
He said The Platform was a \u201cdigital media platform – radio is a specific method of transmission, which we don\u2019t do\u201d.<\/p>\n
He said the BSA was \u201creally pushing the boat out here\u201d. <\/p>\n
\u201cI reckon you\u2019ve got to go back to Parliament. I reckon Parliament\u2019s got to ask whether the Broadcasting Standards Authority even has a reason for existing. <\/p>\n
\u201cYou can\u2019t make up the rules as you go along, and after three years, you can\u2019t change the rules on me. <\/p>\n
\u201cThe problem is if I\u2019m caught, everyone\u2019s caught every time you go live – anyone who wants to communicate with an audience via the internet without the expense, without setting up a massive terrestrial broadcasting structure, you are all going to be covered by the BSA if you\u2019re a company.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cI think the Broadcasting Standards Authority is a joke. I think what it\u2019s done is appalling and Orwellian. <\/p>\n
\u201cI will not comply.\u201d<\/p>\n
The BSA responds<\/p>\n
BSA chief executive Stacey Wood said, \u201cas the regulator of the Broadcasting Act for the last 36 years, yes, we are aware of the ramifications of this decision\u201d.<\/p>\n
\u201cAs described, this decision is provisional and was provided to the broadcaster and the complainant for comment. This was signed off by the board in the normal way \u2013 it\u2019s an interlocutory decision only, so not an assessment of the merits of the complaint.”<\/p>\n
BSA chair Susie Staley. Photo \/ Supplied<\/p>\n
The BSA board is chair Susie Staley, former TVNZ head of news John Gillespie, Aroha Beck and Karyn Fenton-Ellis.<\/p>\n
Wood said the BSA\u2019s jurisdiction had always been determined by the Broadcasting Act. <\/p>\n
\u201cWe have no intention of acting outside the Act \u2013 our view is that online broadcasting that resembles a traditional TV or radio station falls within our existing jurisdiction. <\/p>\n
\u201cThe definition of \u2018broadcaster\u2019 and \u2018broadcasting\u2019 in Section 2 of the Act isn\u2019t limited to TV or radio \u2013 it talks about programmes transmitted to the public by any means of telecommunication. Laws often have to be applied to changing circumstances \u2013 an obvious example is that laws referring to \u2018documents\u2019 aren\u2019t limited to paper and parchment, but include PDFs and other digital forms.”<\/p>\n
She said the complaint was the first formal referral \u201cabout an online broadcaster of a nature we consider clearly falls within our jurisdiction\u201d.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe have an obligation as a responsible regulator to take it on, while still anticipating reform.<\/p>\n
\u201cOur published policy since 2020 has been that, if we receive a relevant complaint and there\u2019s no other applicable standards body or regulator, and if the complaint raises issues of public interest or a risk of harm, we may accept the complaint and engage with the parties using our established processes.\u201d<\/p>\n
Wood said the BSA was not seeking to censor the media.<\/p>\n
\u201cOur interest is in ensuring the public have access to accurate, reliable media content, and a regulator they can turn to if they think standards are breached. Far from shutting down free speech, freedom of expression is at the heart of every BSA decision.\u201d<\/p>\n
Questioned about the wider ramifications, she said it was \u201cnot possible to say definitively who is and isn\u2019t covered by the Broadcasting Act\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cWhile some types of online media, including The Platform, clearly fall within the wording of the Act, applying it to some types of online media would be less clear-cut. For example, as you\u2019ve alluded to with the Joe Rogan example, there is nothing in the Act that says it applies only to broadcasters in New Zealand \u2013 but we have no intention, or ability, to apply our jurisdiction to every broadcaster worldwide.”<\/p>\n
Editor-at-Large Shayne Currie is one of New Zealand\u2019s most experienced senior journalists and media leaders. He has held executive and senior editorial roles at NZME including Managing Editor, NZ Herald Editor and Herald on Sunday Editor and has a small shareholding in NZME.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"The Platform owner and host Sean Plunket. Photo \/ File On The Platform on Wednesday, Plunket heavily criticised…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":79326,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[74,95,1124,3795,10712,2562,11220,1656,12797,23788,9539,1359,22220,2936,61389,61385,1073,61386,2720,61388,12261,111,43,139,69,1642,53191,1523,3545,3547,61387,34293,4965,3546,11422,417,223,40624,61,6149,13026,5977,102,2963],"class_list":["post-79325","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-new-zealand","tag-after","tag-and","tag-authority","tag-broadcasting","tag-claiming","tag-claims","tag-comment","tag-company","tag-complaint","tag-consider","tag-content","tag-described","tag-going","tag-insider","tag-jumbo","tag-jurisdiction","tag-media","tag-monitor","tag-mori","tag-mumbo","tag-networks","tag-new-zealand","tag-news","tag-newzealand","tag-nz","tag-online","tag-onlineonly","tag-over","tag-platform","tag-plunket","tag-plunkets","tag-preparing","tag-radio","tag-sean","tag-standards","tag-television","tag-the","tag-tikanga","tag-to","tag-war","tag-watchdog","tag-which","tag-with","tag-zealands"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/79325","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=79325"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/79325\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/79326"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=79325"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=79325"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=79325"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}