Spineless leadership at the helm of our largest media outfit makes all Kiwis poorer, not least NZME shareholders.
NZME should get back to the business of offering world-class media, with advertising options included for all legal adverts, not picking and choosing which opinions deserve a hearing, says Jonathan Ayling, chief executive of the Free Speech Union.
NZME happily offered an advertising package to Hobson’s Pledge, signed off on the ads, and submitted their invoice for payment. A few would-be-censors bang their intolerance drum, and the board and management get spooked. This sort of weakness is entirely part of why public trust in the media continues to plummet, and political discourse is more and more polarised.
NZME is a publicly listed private company. They ultimately have the right to reject this advertising. But they deserve strong criticism for this decision, and it’s not surprising that shareholders raise questions as to why good money is being rejected on ideological grounds.
Bad ideas are beaten with better ideas, not censorial grandstanding. Of course, it is appropriate that advertorial material meet legal standards. But that’s not the question here. Opponents of Hobson’s Pledge should challenge the ad with the Advertising Standard’s Authority, not contest NZME’s right and interest in running advertorial content.
Large media outlets like NZME are prone to complain endlessly about the unsustainability of the media ecosystem, and how social media is stealing their advertising revenue. NZME should stand up to political toy-throwing and simply offer the same advertising package to those who would express opposite views. Such contests of ideas belong in full view of the public, not hidden in the back offices of NZME.
This article was originally published by the Daily Telegraph New Zealand.
