The contentious remarks by New Zealand First leader Winston Peters regarding the Public Interest Journalism Fund (PIJF) have reignited debates about the merits of government-funded news media.
Winston Peters, the newly sworn-in deputy prime minister of New Zealand, wasted no time in expressing his long-standing animosity towards the news media. In a serious accusation, Peters claimed that the PIJF, established under the previous Labour government, amounted to “bribery” and demanded transparency from the press gallery. These remarks have not only sparked controversy but have also highlighted a growing mistrust of mainstream and government-funded media among certain segments of the public. This article delves into the background of the PIJF, examines Peters’ claims, and explores the broader implications of publicly subsidized news media.
The Purpose and Function of the PIJF
The PIJF was created as part of the Labour government’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic, which led to a decline in advertising revenue for news outlets. Administered by NZ On Air, the fund provided NZ$55 million between 2021 and 2023 to support local news initiatives, including journalist roles, specific projects, and industry development and training. Its primary goal was to extend news reporting into areas that were not commercially viable, such as local democracy, courts, regional and farming issues, and Māori and Pasifika affairs.
Peters’ Accusation of “Bribery”
Winston Peters’ accusation of “bribery” in relation to the PIJF may stem from his personal unease with the media. During the election campaign, he labeled an interviewer as a “dirt merchant,” “corrupt,” and a “left-wing shill.” However, it is also possible that Peters has long-standing reservations about publicly funded media mechanisms like the PIJF. NZ First, while in coalition with Labour from 2017 to 2023, had reportedly vetoed an earlier proposal for such a fund due to concerns about potential misconstrual as bribery.
Mistrust of Mainstream Media and Government Influence
The controversy surrounding the PIJF and Peters’ remarks reflects a broader and growing mistrust of mainstream and government-funded media among certain sections of the public. While healthy skepticism towards the news is essential, wholesale cynicism can be detrimental to democracy and social cohesion, particularly in an era of rampant disinformation on unregulated platforms. Opponents of the PIJF capitalized on perceptions of bias and government influence to attack the fund, leading to the emergence of disinformation and conspiracy theories that were difficult to counter with factual evidence.
Misinformation and Funding Criteria
One common theme of misinformation about the PIJF was the claim that all funding applications had to conform to an ideologically motivated commitment to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. While the fund’s guidelines did promote the principles of Partnership, Participation, and Active Protection under Te Tiriti o Waitangi, this was not a generic requirement for all applications. NZ On Air commissioned an external report on a Treaty-informed reporting framework to address structural racism and colonization in journalism, but these were not the criteria used to administer funding decisions.
NZ On Air’s Independence and Transparency
NZ On Air, which has been in operation since 1989, has a track record of transparently and independently disbursing contestable public funds. Factual content and current affairs have been funded since 2009. If the mechanism were prone to government interference, one would question why it has only become a concern recently. The PIJF supported over 200 journalist roles, projects, and training programs across the sector, making it unlikely that any government interference would have gone unnoticed.
Conclusion:
The controversy surrounding Winston Peters’ accusation and the PIJF highlights the ongoing debates surrounding publicly subsidized news media. While healthy skepticism is crucial, it is important to distinguish between genuine concerns and disinformation. Public policy decisions should be based on accurate information and not be unduly influenced by conspiracy theories. The real threat to democracy lies in the weaponized dissemination of political disinformation, which undermines public trust and the independence of the media. As the media landscape continues to evolve, finding alternative funding mechanisms that ensure the sustainability and independence of public-interest journalism becomes increasingly important.
Leave a Reply