« A funny thing happened on the way to abolishing the BSA… | Main | New Advertising Code »
The future of media regulation in New Zealand?
By Steven | October 14, 2026
There’s a new media self-regulatory body in town. It’s called the IJC: the Independent Journalist Collective. The founding members are Cameron Slater, David Farrar, Brynn Neilson, Penny Marie and Simon Anderson, or at least their organisations. From a brief look at their websites I detect… a certain similarity in their political leanings.
To become members, applicants must be “actively engaged in journalism, news reporting, commentary, media production, or a related field” and must be sponsored by two existing members.
The IJC has a Code of Ethics, which makes a fair fist of covering – albeit succinctly – the main four ethical tenets: accuracy, fairness, balance and privacy. Oddly, though, the “Fairness and Balance” standard doesn’t mention fairness, and there’s no requirement that fact and opinion be distinguished as there is in most other codes of ethics I’ve seen. Brynn Neilson says it wasn’t identified as necessary but if it becomes an issue then it may be included at a later date. Nor is there any rule about discrimination or denigration. Neilson says it’s part of fairness. But fairness isn’t even in the wording of the standard! Neilson: “We’re still a new “bare bones” organisation. If that policy needs updating, then it likely will be, but at present it’s not an issue. I designed IJC on the the Continuous Business Improvement model which is ongoing and systematic improvement of services and processes through incremental change. If we come across something that forces a large change, so be it, we’ll pivot and restructure our organisation.”
There is, however, a complaints process, with a promise to release rulings “within a reasonable time-frame”. Who rules on the complaints? The IJC membership committee. Um, okay. Who’s on the committee? Who knows? The website doesn’t say. Neilson: “That’s not relevant. We’re a private organisation.” But aren’t you about public trust? The Media Council is private too, and it tells people these things. Neilson: “Presently we have less than 10 members so if a complaint was made, then all the members not in the complaint could decide the outcome. But as we grow larger, then the Incorporated Society Board would handle the complaints or refer them to a sub-committee. It’s still a work in progress and will improve once we get a complaint.“
Yesterday afternoon I wrote to ask them about that [UPDATE 27 October – I just found that email in my drafts, so I didn’t send it; but I did it this morning. Brynn Neilson’s responses are set out in bold in this post]. I also asked who decides who goes on that committee, and whether there are any public members, as there are on the BSA and Media Council (it doesn’t look like it). (See above)
I can’t help but wonder how readily some of the members’ publications would survive a complaint arguing inaccuracy, unfairness (if it’s actually a standard in play), or failure to present “relevant viewpoints”.
I also asked whether they plan to apply under the new Broadcasting Amendment Bill (if it’s passed) or the existing Broadcasting Act (if it’s not) for regulatory recognition. If they get that, their members will be exempt from the Privacy Act in their news activities, and will have some court attendance rights. Neilson: “No. We’re a private organisation.” But that doesn’t stop them from applying if they want to.
This does raise questions about what criteria the government will use to decide who gets this regulatory recognition.
Anyway, we might be getting a glimpse of the future of media regulation in this country – a patchwork of different voluntary bodies policing different standards with different degrees of effectiveness.
Brynn chastised me (fairly) for not writing to him before publishing his post, and also said I didn’t explain why they didn’t trust the existing media regulatory agencies. I said there was nothing about that on the IJC website, but offered him a chance to put his views. Here they are: I’ve worked in television, radio, and print. Made submissions to the the BSA. I also frequently report the bias of our mainstream media that have made trust in MSM the lowest it’s ever been. The ideological bias permeates our media institutions and as independent Journalists we don’t want to be any part of it – many journalists in MSM don’t have a choice and have to keep quiet because 85% of their NZ Journalists colleagues identify as left leaning. Check out this post from last night as an example of 1News and RNZ bias: https://x.com/1nzmw/status/2114427233393955168
Topics: General | Comments Off on The future of media regulation in New Zealand?