Free Speech Union Welcomes BSA Shake-up but Warns: the Devil Will Be in the Legislation

Free Speech Union Welcomes BSA Shake-up but Warns: the Devil Will Be in the Legislation 

The Free Speech Union commends Minister Goldsmith’s instinct to scrap the Broadcasting Standards Authority and says a proposal by former District Court Judge David Harvey for a unified regulator covering media standards and online harm deserves serious consideration. 

Goldsmith told the Ryan Bridge Today show he is “tempted to scrap” the 37-year-old BSA, with both NZ First and ACT supporting abolition. Harvey’s proposal goes further, replacing the BSA, the voluntary Media Council, and the Harmful Digital Communications Act framework with a single Media and Communications Authority. The authority would operate across three divisions: news media standards, professional content standards, and online platform harm, covering everything from editorial accountability to algorithmic amplification and platform design. 

“The BSA was built for the era of three television channels. Its attempt to claim jurisdiction over an online-only broadcaster proved the point: the institution has outgrown its mandate and it is time to let it go,” said Jillaine Heather, CEO of the Free Speech Union of New Zealand. 

“Harvey’s proposal starts in the right place. Freedom of expression as the default. Harm defined to explicitly exclude mere offence, discomfort, and exposure to controversial ideas. Government locked out of code-setting and content decisions. Voluntary membership for news media. These are principles we have argued for, and we want to see them survive into legislation.” 

The Free Speech Union noted that the proposal’s scope is substantial. It would establish a new regulatory framework for online platforms, reform the Harmful Digital Communications Act, broaden the legal definition of harm, and introduce a backstop power allowing the regulator to impose mandatory standards where industry self-regulation falls short. 

“We need to see the legislation before we can say whether this framework protects free expression or inadvertently creates new tools to restrict it,” said Heather. 

The Free Speech Union identified several areas it will scrutinise as policy development proceeds, including the breadth of the proposed harm definition, proposed defences, the conditions under which backstop powers could be exercised, the risk that compulsory platform regulation contaminates the voluntary news media framework, and how appointments to the governing board and Communications Tribunal are made. 

“We welcome the direction of travel. Goldsmith is right to scrap the BSA, and Harvey has produced serious, thoughtful work. But the gap between good principles and good legislation is where free speech lives or dies. We will be at the table, and we will be reading every line,” said Heather. 

ENDS 

Notes to editor: 

The Free Speech Union of New Zealand is an independent, non-partisan organisation that advocates for the right of all New Zealanders to express their views without fear of punishment or reprisal. 

David Harvey’s proposal, “A Framework for Media Regulation in the Digital Age” (2026), proposes a Media and Communications Authority with three divisions: Division 1 (news media standards, voluntary), Division 2 (professional content standards, voluntary), and Division 3 (online platform harm, compulsory code development for platforms but voluntary compliance with safe harbour incentive). A separate Communications Tribunal would hear escalated complaints across all three divisions. 

FSU Media Contact: Jillaine Heather | [email protected] |