The Free Speech Union (FSU) has welcomed the Government’s decision to disestablish the Broadcasting Standards Authority (BSA), describing the move as a major reversal of what it calls years of regulatory overreach into online speech.
By elocal staff
In a media release issued on May 6, Free Speech Union Chief Executive Jillaine Heather said the Government had made “the right call” by abandoning the BSA model and instead investigating voluntary self-regulation options for media complaints.
“For more than 20 years, Parliament declined to extend the BSA's jurisdiction over the internet. The BSA tried to take that power for itself anyway. A regulator cannot help itself to powers Parliament has refused to give,” Heather stated.
The organisation also credited public opposition to the BSA’s recent actions, noting that more than 12,000 New Zealanders had signed its petition titled “Put the BSA Back in its Place.”
“Credit to every New Zealander who refused to accept backdoor censorship,” Heather said.
FSU calls for current complaints against The Platform to be dropped
A major focus of the Free Speech Union’s statement was the BSA’s ongoing complaints process involving online broadcaster The Platform.
According to the FSU, the Authority is currently pursuing three active complaints against the media outlet under what the organisation describes as a disputed interpretation of the Broadcasting Act 1989.
“The BSA is currently prosecuting three complaints against The Platform under a jurisdictional theory the Government has just repudiated,” Heather said.
“The Authority cannot continue to exercise a power Parliament is about to remove. Those cases must be dropped immediately. The process is already the punishment.”
The FSU argues the Government’s decision to dismantle the BSA effectively undermines the legal foundation for those complaints to continue.
Concerns over wider speech regulation
The media release argues the BSA issue reflects a broader trend involving regulators and government departments gradually expanding control over online speech without clear parliamentary mandates.
The organisation specifically singled out the Department of Internal Affairs (DIA), accusing it of continuing to develop online content regulation systems before a full public debate has taken place.
“The Department of Internal Affairs is the clearest example, pressing on with structures and proposals on online content and ‘safer online services’ while the open conversation about whether and how New Zealanders want online speech regulated has not yet happened in Parliament with public input.”
The Free Speech Union argues that decisions affecting freedom of expression should only occur through transparent democratic processes involving public consultation and legislation.
“In a democracy, the rules that govern speech are decided by the people we elect, after public consultation, in legislation,” Heather said.
“They are not decided by a regulator's creative interpretation of a 1989 Act, and they are not decided by a department building the apparatus first and inviting the debate later.”
FSU demands wider review of online speech regulation
The organisation is now calling on the Government to take additional action beyond scrapping the BSA.
Its demands include:
- Directing the BSA to immediately discontinue all live online complaints, including the three current complaints against The Platform
- Pausing Department of Internal Affairs work on online content regulation until Parliament conducts open public consultation on the issue
The Free Speech Union says the Government’s move against the BSA represents the first major pushback against what it sees as steadily expanding speech controls in New Zealand.
“For two decades, free speech in New Zealand has been quietly eroded by regulators and departments expanding their own mandates,” Heather stated.
“Today's BSA decision is the first significant reversal of that trend. We will keep holding the Government to account on the rest.”
Background to the dispute
According to the Free Speech Union, the dispute intensified after the BSA issued an interlocutory jurisdiction decision on March 31, 2026, claiming for the first time the power to regulate an independent online publisher under the Broadcasting Act 1989.
The decision drew criticism from a range of legal commentators and political figures, including David Harvey, Liam Hehir, David Farrar, The Spinoff’s Duncan Greive, Winston Peters and David Seymour.
On April 17, 2026, the BSA formally notified The Platform of three complaints under that jurisdiction, which reportedly remain active.
The Free Speech Union also referenced the Law Commission’s 2013 report The News Media Meets ‘New Media’, which identified online-only publishers as existing outside the BSA’s traditional regulatory scope, a gap successive governments had declined to formally close.