any communication between Crown Law and the Broadcasting Standards Authority around whether a person who publishes audio and video over the Internet can be regarded as a broadcaster under the Broadcastings Act 1989.
If there is such advice, and it is legally privileged, I would still like to know whether such advice was sought and given, even if the actual advice can’t be provided.
Crown Law has responded:
We have found no record of any advice provided by Crown Law on the matter you identified.
This is very telling. Crown Law is the Government’s Legal Advisor. If the BSA had gone to Crown Law for legal advice on whether a publisher of video or audio over the Internet can be considered a broadcaster under the Broadcasting Act, and considered that advice in deciding that they were, then they would be on more defensible grounds.
But they didn’t. They just got around a table and said “Hey let’s expand to include the Internet”.
This whole episode just reeks of bad faith.
David Farrar runs Curia Market Research, a specialist opinion polling and research agency, and the popular Kiwiblog where this article was sourced. He previously worked in the Parliament for eight years, serving two National Party Prime Ministers and three Opposition Leaders
2 comments:
It should be remembered though, that BSA didn't completely act on their own. They checked in with Goldsmith first and he gave them the OK. Goldsmith is supposed to be Minister of Justice but is more interested in appeasing the woke media, judiciary and public service. A classic situation of the tail wagging the dog.
Goldsmith is also Minister for Media and Communications Why no reform of the biased msm? Laura McClure (ACT) has a new bill to abolish the BSA - concrete action.
Post a Comment
Thanks for engaging in the debate!
Because this is a public forum, we will only publish comments that are respectful and do NOT contain links to other sites. We appreciate your cooperation.