Prime Minister Christopher Luxon says he doesn’t recall telling provocative broadcaster Sean Plunket he “had his back” over Broadcasting Standards Authority (BSA) jurisdiction concerns and insists there has been no government interference.
In a decision released on Wednesday, the BSA determined it could consider a complaint about Plunket’s online media network The Platform.
Plunket told The Post he was disappointed in the Government’s lack of action on this, labelling Broadcasting Minister Paul Goldsmith “as much use as an ashtray on a motorcycle” and saying he had received a “personal assurance” from the prime minister last year.
“[He] said to me, and I'll quote, ‘Don't worry, mate, we've got your back on this’.”
Read more:
Speaking at Parliament on Wednesday, Luxon said he did not remember that exchange. “We have not interfered in this process at all. The BSA is independent, but there is a range of options. I don’t recall every conversation I have with everybody.”
But Plunket is standing firm, saying the conversation happened after a post-Cabinet press conference last year while Luxon was heading for the lifts near parliament’s reception.
“That is the precise moment he said it,” Plunket said.
Goldsmith, asked for his response to Plunket’s description of him, told reporters The Platform host was “interested in attracting people to listen to his show, and he says all sorts of outrageous things. Good luck to him”.
He acknowledged the existing media legislation was “not as clear as it should be” and several options were available.
“One, just leave it as it is and leave it to the BSA to be clear about its jurisdiction and that may be challenged in the courts. Or we could try and change the legislation to be clearer, or we could just disestablish the BSA and go to a different kind of monitoring and look, I think that's something that we as a government need to consider.”
It was Plunket’s comments on The Platform last year that triggered the original complaint that led to this decision.
The complainant, Richard Fanselow, wrote to The Platform about what he alleged were “unacceptable racist comments” in a July 22 2025 programme.
Plunket responded to the complainant: “You plonker, we aren’t subject to the Broadcasting Standards Authority.”
Plunket is standing by his claim that the BSA’s call is wrong and his show should not be covered by its jurisdiction.
“Given that it's wrong in law and shows inherent bias and is not sanctioned by Parliament, I was surprised,” Plunket told The Post.
“But given the ideological stupidity that the BSA has demonstrated to date, I wasn't surprised.”
In its ruling, released this morning, the BSA considered whether transmissions by The Platform met the definition of a broadcast for the purposes of the Broadcasting Standards Act, or could be excluded.
“If Parliament had intended the Act to apply solely to transmission using the spectrum, it would have been simple to say that in the broadcasting definition – mirroring the Broadcasting Act 1976 definition,” the authority wrote.
“The obvious intention of including a broad term like ‘other means of telecommunication’ is to allow for broadcasting using other transmission methods.”
One exception to the definition of broadcasting applies to “on demand” content. The authority ruled that while there was a “technical argument” that internet transmissions occur on demand, the live transmissions of The Platform are “functionally equivalent to other traditional broadcasts”. Therefore, the on demand exception does not apply.
While the BSA’s ruling has implications for online media operators like Plunket, the authority confirmed it did not have jurisdiction over streaming content such as from Netflix, Disney+ or YouTube.
“Having determined the Act applies to programmes streamed by an online broadcaster, further research and public consultation is required to address the implications for any equivalent New Zealand broadcasters and to review our policies, procedures and codes in light of the determination,” the authority said.
Plunket said he knew of “numerous lawyers” that had considered the issue and determined the BSA was wrong to broaden its remit.
While the BSA, in comments published alongside the decision, said it did not want to curtail free speech or play censor, Plunket believed otherwise.
“I think they just want to be able to label people they don't like racists,” he said.
It’s understood that while the authority intended to release this decision publicly after both parties to the complaint had been given a chance to digest the findings, it was released online this morning due to aspects of it being discussed live on The Platform.
Plunket, on his show this morning, labelled the decision a “power grab” and compared it to an April Fool’s joke.
New Zealand First leader Winston Peters, meanwhile, said the authority’s actions bordered on “fascist behaviour”.
Goldsmith said he did not agree with this characterisation.
Both New Zealand First and ACT are calling for the BSA to be abolished, with the latter sponsoring a member’s bill that would disestablish the agency.
ACT is urging the Government as a whole to adopt it, but leader David Seymour confirmed that, at this stage, Cabinet was not looking at the issue.
Fonterra admits misleading public with 100% NZ grass-fed butter claim
Town Hall faces fresh hurdle as council decisions tipped to hit revenue
Iran war: Billing Donald Trump and the US for staff’s increased fuel costs just what the doctor ordered
Inside Brisbane’s new era of sunshine and style
Auckland’s victory in dog fight with Government
