Significant regulatory reform proposed for New Zealand media

The Ministry for Culture and Heritage recently released a consultation document outlining five draft proposals to update and modernise media and content regulation in New Zealand.

The current regulatory framework

New Zealand’s current media regulation is outdated and relies on several different pieces of legislation and policy to regulate forms of media they were not designed for. This means different pieces of legislation regulate the same content, depending on the format in which it is made available, resulting in confusion and difficulty ensuring that the content is regulated consistently. The Government has had to take urgent action to regulate new forms of media in response to specific events – such as confirming that the Broadcasting Act 1989’s regulation of “livestreaming” extends to online user-controlled livestreaming (in response to the Christchurch terror attack), and the Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Act 1993 being updated in 2020 to apply to Commercial Video on Demand content (in response to a particular programme).

Updating and modernising New Zealand’s approach to media regulation has been a topic of conversation for some time, with previous Governments, Crown entities and industry bodies all recognising the need for change. As recently as 2023 the Department of Internal Affairs released and received public feedback on a consultation document with proposals to regulate online services and media platforms in New Zealand. This consultation largely focused its recommendations on ways to improve protection for young and vulnerable persons.

This new consultation document arrives after the current Government indicated that it did not intend to proceed with the recommendations from the Department of Internal Affairs, following concerns over the impact on freedom of expression.

What does the Ministry for Culture and Heritage propose?

The consultation document sets out five different proposals to reform and update New Zealand’s media and content regulation. The Ministry has sought feedback on all five proposals, with the caveat in the consultation document that the proposals are “high-level, and the Government has not decided whether to progress them”.

Proposal 1 – Ensuring accessibility of local media platforms

Proposal one is focused on increasing the prominence of local apps and channels on smart TVs in New Zealand.

It requires those suppliers that provide smart TVs in New Zealand to ensure that “local TV services” are pre-installed and receive a basic level of prominence (not necessarily a priority prominence) in displays. The intention is that apps (such as TVNZ+ and ThreeNow) and local content will be made more easily and readily available on smart TVs.

The proposal recognises that smart TVs have altered consumer access to different forms of media, facilitating access to big international providers (such as Netflix, Disney+ and Amazon Prime) – whose apps are usually pre-installed on smart TVs sold in New Zealand – over access to local media and content. It also reflects research by the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology, which found that one third of people with a smart TV in their home do not know how to download an app onto it and over half do not know how to customise the order of their smart TV apps. Requiring smart TVs to be sold with local platforms already prominently displayed should make local content more accessible, thereby increasing engagement and investment.

Proposal 2 – Increasing investment into and discoverability of local content  

Proposal two looks to increase investment in New Zealand content.

It would require New Zealand TV broadcasters, New Zealand streaming platforms and global streaming platforms that operate in New Zealand to:

• invest a proportion of annual revenue into the creation or acquisition of local content; and

• implement measures to promote and clearly display local content to help consumers find new local content.

The proposal recognises that the popular global streaming platforms show relatively little local content – both content about New Zealanders and New Zealand, and content that is filmed, produced or edited in New Zealand. Traditionally, New Zealand broadcasters of TV and radio have pushed local content (with TVNZ and Whakaata Māori both having an obligation to do so) and have been motivated to do so by viewer engagement. But reduced viewer engagement with “traditional” local broadcasting has meant reduced exposure to content with a New Zealand focus.

By requiring all those that distribute media in New Zealand to invest in local content – not just funded broadcasters of traditional TV and radio – there should be increased opportunities for New Zealand stories to be told, and for New Zealanders to be involved in telling stories.

Proposal 3 – Increasing use of closed captioning and audio descriptions

Proposal three would create legislative obligations on TV broadcasters and streaming platforms to provide equitable access to their content, namely by introducing progressive targets for the availability of closed captioning and audio descriptions for their content in New Zealand. This would increase the access of New Zealanders who are deaf, hard of hearing, blind or vision impaired to media coverage, and enable New Zealand to better comply with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

Currently there is no legislative requirement for broadcasters or streaming providers to enable closed captioning and audio descriptions and, as such, it is rarely provided (although the Government provides some funding for closed captioning and audio descriptions for TVNZ’s broadcast channels). Proposal three suggests that broadcasters and streaming providers will need to be mandated to do so.

Proposal 4 – Modernising professional media regulation

Proposal four updates the broadcasting standards regime to cover all professional media operating in New Zealand and expands the role of the Broadcasting Standards Authority accordingly.

The proposal does not outline the specifics of the proposed standards regime, other than noting it will protect and promote media independence and freedom of expression, and that the standards are unlikely to differ substantially from existing broadcasting standards. The proposal also suggests that the role of the regulator should be revised to reduce the focus on resolving audience complaints about media content, with more of a focus on “ensuring positive system-level outcomes”. This would include:

• the development of media standards in collaboration with the industry to apply to all “professional media in New Zealand” – noting that the definition of “professional media” is not yet set, but would cover all types of broadcasters (including global streaming providers) and would exclude platforms that primarily host user-generated content, such as social media or search engines;

• education, research and advice on media standards to support the sector and audiences;

• monitoring the regime’s effectiveness;

• administering electoral broadcasting rules; and

• providing a “backstop” for complaints resolution when a complainant is not satisfied with the response from the relevant media organisation, and then further dissatisfied with the response of an industry self-regulatory body.

The current regulatory system in New Zealand relies on both the Broadcasting Act 1989, and the Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Act 1993. This can be confusing to interpret and can result in the same content being regulated differently (or not at all) depending on how that media is made available to New Zealand consumers. Modernising the legislation so that it is “platform agnostic” is, therefore, likely to be a welcome development for the industry but much will depend on the detail, which has not yet been published.

It is also not yet clear how the expanded regulatory role of the Broadcasting Standards Authority would be funded. However, the proposal specifically recognises that, if progressed, further work will be required to consider the future of the broadcasting levy (a levy currently paid by any broadcaster that earns over $500,000 annually) to account for this increased role. Additional work will also be required on labelling and classification requirements, particularly for Commercial Video on Demand providers who are already subject to a specific regime under the Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Act 1993.

It is interesting to note that proposal four (at this stage), does not promote the same focus as the earlier Department of Internal Affairs consultation document, which had the key priority of using the standards to protect young and vulnerable persons from harm.   

Proposal 5 – Streamlining Crown content funders

Proposal five recommends establishing a single content funding entity that consolidates the New Zealand Film Commission and NZ On Air (the current mandated media funding bodies in New Zealand). The goal is to improve the efficiency and strategy of funding decisions.

The proposal notes that the current approach of two different Crown screen funding entities operating in parallel might be resulting in overlapping Government resourcing. It also makes it harder to implement a cohesive approach to funding strategy. NZ On Air and the New Zealand Film Commission have released a joint statement acknowledging the proposal and encouraging widespread consultation and the opportunity to work with the Ministry of Culture and Heritage in connection with the reform.

Industry views on this proposal appear to be divided, with concerns being raised around the lack of diversity of funding this would result in (among other things).  

Next steps

Public consultation on the proposals was open until 23 March 2025, and we have started to see the first of the submissions. The Broadcasting Standards Authority has recently released its submission, which focuses on Proposal 4. The Broadcasting Standards Authority indicates that it strongly supports the need for an update to media regulation generally but has some initial concerns with the proposal. In particular, the Broadcasting Standards Authority has highlighted the need to:

• clarify who incurs the costs and expenses with the reform (both for the Broadcasting Standards Authority and individual media entities); and

• ensure any reform is simple, easy to follow and “platform neutral” (including potentially capturing platforms that focus on user generated content, such as YouTube).

The Ministry of Culture and Heritage says it will consider all feedback and use it to inform further work and final decisions on the proposals. The consultation paper notes that any proposals that are ultimately agreed to by Cabinet will require legislation to implement, and that would come into force “in 2026 at the earliest”.

If you have any questions about how these proposals might impact your business or would like us to keep you updated on the reform programme, get in touch with our team.

‍