This piece critiques the abrupt abolition of the Broadcasting Standards Authority, arguing it was driven by political considerations rather than democratic or regulatory necessity, and highlights the controversial decision to apply its jurisdiction to Sean Plunket's online show,쩌
How the framings classify across 5 articles. Each framing is labelled by a small AI stance classifier; see the methodology page for details.
Stacked weekly counts; colour by lean. “n/a” covers government and iwi-Māori sources where lean isn't applicable.
How this topic has been named, week by week. A new alias winning out is usually a framing shift.
How the news corpus has covered this same topic over the last 12 weeks. 2 articles from RNZ, Stuff, NZ Herald, ODT, 1News, Newsroom and The Spinoff. Click through to the press view for the full panel.
Up to 12 framings spread across orientations. Each framing is a short phrase the topic extractor generated to characterise the piece's stance — not a quote from the source. Click through to read the original.
growing gap between regulation and online media
Without BSA, ‘people will be able to say anything about anything’ – complainantoutdated and fragmented
Does abolishing the BSA mean the end of enforceable media standards in general?Social-media signal on the same topic, drawn from the social lens. Engagement is likes + 2×shares + 3×replies, the same weighting used across the digest cards. View on /social →
Spotted something wrong on this page? Report a correction.
