The Broadcasting Standards Authority is being scrapped, sparking debate over the future of media regulation, potential decline in journalistic standards, and the possible expansion of the Media Council's role in overseeing online and print media.
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. 1 article from RNZ, Stuff, NZ Herald, ODT, 1News, Newsroom and The Spinoff. Click through to the press view for the full panel.
Verbatim segments from politicians speaking on podcasts and radio shows about this topic. Sourced via the voice-reference library — each speaker has been confirmed manually from their voice clip. Click play to stream the original audio from the publisher, pre-seeked to the moment the quote starts.
I worry about Paul Goldsmith's ability to make a decision as I tried to suggest to him, you know. quietly and politely earlier but you're saying it's abolition is I would have thought done by morning tea let's move on to the important stuff sort of call but he seems to have been waxing and waning and pontificating for the past two years of government at least he's got there though so the Broadcasting Standards Authority is over thank the good Lord for that it was basically from another time pre-streaming pre-international no borders broadcasting it caught a few originals like us left in a weird old net that made no sense and that's on top of the fact In fact, they had next to no complaints anyway, given one, who can be bothered these days, and two, most of the industry is professionally run anyway. So the media council will apparently take over some of these duties, which I'm kind of torn over. I think we need someone who corrects actual mistakes, you know, factual mistakes. A decision they gave earlier on the Inter-Islander story found that the numbers used in the story on the costings were wrong, Sir Winston Peters complained he was right. They need to correct the record. Now the point in that particular example just this week is he went to the company who published the story. They rejected the argument. Now you would have liked to have thought they were better than that, hence the need for the council. But those sort of examples aside, what these quasi-courts end up doing is adjudicating on nuance and argument based on the moaning of some bored loser in suburbia who'd be probably better off watching less telly, reading less news and writing fewer letters. I do worry about the council, the current lot appear all lawyers and consultants. There's not a single... single proper broadcaster there they do they tell me have some industry peeps who offer advice but let me tell you this unless you've driven a three-hour live radio program or a live television show with its varying unpredictables you've got no idea of the pressure that unfolds literally instantly therefore the potential for verbal carnage and yet that's the sort of thing they pass judgment on anyway the bsa been there done that made no difference an idea past its time and will not be missed
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.
concern over politicization and lack of industry insight
Mike's Minute: Good riddance to the BSASocial-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.