New Zealand Drops Plans to Establish Internet Content Regulator

A smartphone and a computer screen displaying the logos of the Instagram, Facebook, WhatsApp, and their parent company Meta in Toulouse, southwestern France, on Jan. 12, 2023. Lionel Bovaventure/AFP via Getty Images

While Australian leaders have lifted funding for its online content regulator, New Zealand has taken a completely opposite approach.

Last year, the Department of Internal Affairs proposed a mandatory code of conduct for social media platforms such as Meta, X, and YouTube.

It also proposed a new “independent regulator” that would have the power to order material be taken down, as well as fine Big Tech firms for any significant breaches—the exact model in Australia.

A spokesperson for the Department claimed that, like Australia, the rules would apply to all relevant companies regardless of whether they were registered in New Zealand or resident there.

At the time, Internal Affairs Policy Manager Suzanne Doig said the department did not know if it had the jurisdiction, for example, to fine X for a breach if the company was not signed up to its code of conduct.

But she said Internal Affairs was “clear that the platforms are captured by the codes regardless of whether they sign up to them or not.”

Traditional media would also come under the new regulator, which would have replaced self-regulatory industry bodies such as the Media Council, and independent state agencies such as the Broadcasting Standards Authority.

Public Response Negative

But it seems two factors—public response to the initial discussion paper, and the election of a new government with other priorities—have stymied the proposal, with a spokesperson for the Department recently confirming it was not continuing with the project.

“Content regulatory reform of the scale proposed by the Safer Online Services and Media Platforms work is not a ministerial priority for the Minister of Internal Affairs Brooke van Velden,” he said.

Over 20,000 submissions were received from individuals and organisations, but until the proposal was abandoned, Internal Affairs refused requests to release them, or a summary of them, under the Official Information Act.

The vast majority of responses from individuals, which mainly comprised 18,978 responses submitted through an online campaigning site established by the NZ Free Speech Union, were opposed.

The Union’s Chief Executive Jonathan Ayling described the proposal as “just ‘hate’ speech laws for the internet.”

“With most media consumed online and social media being the new ‘public square,’ it’s important for our democracy that opinions are freely shared on the internet,” he said in a statement.

The majority of the submissions received from 105 organisations—including technology, media, and regulators—were supportive.

InternetNZ, the non-profit organisation that manages the “.nz” internet domain, expressed its disappointment with the move to abandon the proposal.

“Stating it is not a priority means it is unlikely there would be anything that would replace or advance this area of work, which is also deeply disappointing,” CEO Vivien Maidaborn said.

The abandonment of the idea means internet regulation will continue to focus on a voluntary code brokered by Netsafe in 2022, which has been backed by Meta, Google, TikTok, Amazon, and X.

But the Aotearoa Code of Practice for Online Safety and Harms has been criticised by some non-profit organisations, including InternetNZ, as lacking legitimacy.