Government ministers have publicly mused about changing the legislation that governs media regulators.
During a select committee briefing this week, regulator the Broadcasting Standards Authority (BSA) reaffirmed its longstanding desire for reform to improve its legislation to fit the digital media environment.
The BSA was established under the Broadcasting Act in 1989 and is tasked with upholding standards across New Zealand's broadcasters.
In 1989, television was vastly different. TV3 launched, as did Paul Holmes' show and the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. There were just three terrestrial channels, no Sky TV, and streaming video signals would remain technically unfeasible for more than another decade.
Thirty-seven years later, the rise of online media has blurred what being a 'broadcaster' actually means.
This was the backdrop for the BSA's appearance before Parliament's Economic Development, Science and Innovation Committee this week, where BSA chief executive Stacey Wood and chair Susie Staley faced questions about the regulator's role, amid speculation that it may be on borrowed time.
Wood was clear from the outset that the BSA has long been craving legislative guidance or reform to keep pace with changes in the media environment.
"This is an issue that's been the topic of a lot of commentary in the last six months," Wood said. "We do need legislative clarity to bring our Act into the present or replace it entirely."
According to Wood, the Broadcasting Standards Act "explicitly refers to programmes transmitted by radio waves or other means of telecommunication," which the BSA deems as including the likes of Sean Plunket's outlet The Platform.
Hovering over this discussion was the recent discourse relating to whether The Platform should be defined as a broadcaster, and therefore be subject to the BSA, and to complaints regarding its standards like fairness, balance or "good taste and decency".
Unsurprisingly, committee MPs were keen to hear from the BSA first-hand about their position on how the term 'broadcasting' should be interpreted.
While the navigation of changing mediascapes took up most of the discussion, the committee also explored broader themes around media standards and public trust in what is an increasingly polarised society.
Wood said complaint data did not suggest a decline in standards, noting that fewer than 10% of complaints are upheld, and that criticism of media bias comes from across the political spectrum.
"Broadly, our traditional broadcasters do apply the standards well, and even though there's often quite a lot of commentary around how the news is told, I think it's easier for that noise to be louder now," Wood said.
The most pointed exchange came near the end of the session, when ACT MP and committee chair Parmjeet Parmar asked Wood and Staley how they justify the BSA's existence.
Staley responded that the Authority is a statutory body carrying out the role assigned to it by Parliament, and questions about its future ultimately sit with lawmakers.
"With all respect, I'm not sure it is necessary for us to justify our existence," Staley said, adding that governments around the world are grappling with how to regulate modern media.
Parmar's party has been critical of the regulator. Fellow MP Laura McClure has a member's bill in the biscuit tin (where it relies on luck in the ballot), proposing the BSA be scrapped.
Whether that bill is chosen is a matter of chance, but Broadcasting Minister Paul Goldsmith has also indicated the Authority's future is open for discussion.
This story was first published on rnz.co.nz |  |
