Latest news with #JonathanAyling
Scoop
5 days ago
- Business
- Scoop
Free Speech Union Welcomes NZME Board Refresh, A Hopeful Sign For Media Balance
Press Release – Free Speech Union This change promises a return to more factual reporting if the Board can restore the traditional journalistic ethics of the fourth estate. The announcement of NZME's board refresh signals hope for a return to more balanced reporting of news, which is an essential component of a healthy democracy. The Free Speech Union was pleased to play an advocacy role in this, says Nick Hanne of the Free Speech Union. 'Last year, the Free Speech Union urged supporters concerned about free and open discourse to get enough NZME shares to gain voting rights. FSU CEO Jonathan Ayling encouraged experienced people to put themselves forward for NZME board positions. 'The Free Speech Union has repeatedly called on NZME to stop censoring those views which appear to be offensive to certain staff and their stifling need to be 'politically correct'. The FSU also arranged meetings with the Managing Director and the Senior Editor, urging a restoration of the fundamental balance needed for the NZ Herald to stay a newspaper of record. 'We reminded them of how the Commerce Commission turned down their merger with Stuff, because the loss of media pluralism would be so damaging to democracy. We welcome the appointments of Steven Joyce and Jim Grenon on the NZME board and believe they'll play a crucial role in fixing this. 'Mr Grenon has weathered a lot of unjust criticism in pursuing this 'audacious' outcome. But his principled determination to defend broad viewpoint representation will help reestablish the centrality of free speech in our democracy. 'The media plays a crucial role in Kiwis' ability to seek, receive, and impart information, so it's essential that they platform multiple viewpoints on issues of public interest. This change promises a return to more factual reporting if the Board can restore the traditional journalistic ethics of the fourth estate. 'Kiwis deserve news which offers coverage rather than censorship.'
Scoop
5 days ago
- Business
- Scoop
Free Speech Union Welcomes NZME Board Refresh, A Hopeful Sign For Media Balance
The announcement of NZME's board refresh signals hope for a return to more balanced reporting of news, which is an essential component of a healthy democracy. The Free Speech Union was pleased to play an advocacy role in this, says Nick Hanne of the Free Speech Union. 'Last year, the Free Speech Union urged supporters concerned about free and open discourse to get enough NZME shares to gain voting rights. FSU CEO Jonathan Ayling encouraged experienced people to put themselves forward for NZME board positions. 'The Free Speech Union has repeatedly called on NZME to stop censoring those views which appear to be offensive to certain staff and their stifling need to be 'politically correct'. The FSU also arranged meetings with the Managing Director and the Senior Editor, urging a restoration of the fundamental balance needed for the NZ Herald to stay a newspaper of record. 'We reminded them of how the Commerce Commission turned down their merger with Stuff, because the loss of media pluralism would be so damaging to democracy. We welcome the appointments of Steven Joyce and Jim Grenon on the NZME board and believe they'll play a crucial role in fixing this. 'Mr Grenon has weathered a lot of unjust criticism in pursuing this 'audacious' outcome. But his principled determination to defend broad viewpoint representation will help reestablish the centrality of free speech in our democracy. 'The media plays a crucial role in Kiwis' ability to seek, receive, and impart information, so it's essential that they platform multiple viewpoints on issues of public interest. This change promises a return to more factual reporting if the Board can restore the traditional journalistic ethics of the fourth estate. 'Kiwis deserve news which offers coverage rather than censorship.'
Scoop
13-05-2025
- Politics
- Scoop
Another Unlawful Arrest According To IPCA: Pattern Of Police Abusing Powers Continues
The Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA) has once again condemned Police for unlawfully arresting a protestor. The 2024 arrest of pro-Palestinian protester John Minto is yet another example in a pattern of Police abusing power to suppress speech and protest rights, says Jonathan Ayling, Chief Executive of the Free Speech Union. 'John Minto was pepper-sprayed and arrested at a pro-Palestinian protest in February last year. The IPCA's investigation has determined both these actions were unlawful. The report also suggests the IPCA simply do not believe aspects of the account of the officer in question. 'A culture that tolerates police lying is a threat to us all. Including the Police. The years of advocacy the Free Speech Union has led should be met with stronger funding for the IPCA to ensure they are able to respond to officers who abuse the power they are trusted with. 'The Free Speech Union currently has a case before the High Court, suing Police for wrongful arrest in the case of Lucy Rogers, which the IPCA also determined was unlawful. This subsequent decision compounds the need for scrutiny of Police actions and policy. 'This report follows a larger report earlier in the year reviewing a series of unlawful decisions at protests where the IPCA determined Police consistently failed to balance public order with fundamental liberties. 'As Minto himself said, 'It was a deliberate targeting of myself. If people are blocking the road in a civil disobedience protest they can expect to be arrested and charged but they should not be assaulted and pepper-sprayed. And if they are on the footpath as I was, they should be left alone.' 'The ability to speak freely, to counter-protest, and to robustly debate pressing issues is fundamental to democracy. This is a core part of what Police are tasked with defending. This litany of failures needs political action.'
Scoop
08-05-2025
- Politics
- Scoop
Police Commit To Removing Thousands Of Incorrectly Applied Historic ‘hate Flags'
Training previously released by Police to recognise, record, and respond to hate speech and hate crime was a reckless path to pursue. The Free Speech Union welcomes the commitment made today by Acting Deputy Police Commissioner, Jill Rogers, that Police will remove all 'non-criminal incidents' that were flagged for 'perceived hate' prior to 1 November, 2024. Following pressure from the Free Speech Union last year, Police changed the subjective threshold for hate perception, and have entirely abandoned subjective 'non-criminal hate incidents' as a category. These are important steps to ensure Police remain focused on actions, not thought, and retain the trust of the community, says Jonathan Ayling, Chief Executive of the Free Speech Union. 'Training previously released by Police to 'recognise, record, and respond' to 'hate speech and hate crime' was a reckless path to pursue. We applaud Police's willingness to acknowledge the unavoidable weaknesses of subjective thresholds for hate, and their decision to change the training they implemented, and to abandon subjective non-criminal hate incidents (NCHIs). 'However, at a recent meeting between Police and the Free Speech Union, we were told it was not possible for Police to correct the data that had been collected while the subjective threshold for 'hate' was in place. This meant Police were choosing to keep records of Kiwis linked to subjective 'hate incidents', even though those incidents no longer matched the Police's own definition of 'hate incidents'. And these Kiwis may not even have known about this. 'Under the previous threshold, as many as 100 flags a month were applied to individual's records held by Police for perceived hate. Once the subjective threshold was removed, this dropped to two or three a month – some months with none at all. This clearly demonstrates how worthless these subjective flags were. The Free Speech Union insisted Police had no place retaining this data that had no value to them, and that could easily be weaponised. 'Police are right to commit to taking steps necessary to remove these misleading flags from profiles over coming months, and to reject perception-based tests for questions as unavoidably subjective as 'hate'.'
Scoop
08-05-2025
- Politics
- Scoop
Police Commit To Removing Thousands Of Incorrectly Applied Historic ‘hate Flags'
The Free Speech Union welcomes the commitment made today by Acting Deputy Police Commissioner, Jill Rogers, that Police will remove all 'non-criminal incidents' that were flagged for 'perceived hate' prior to 1 November, 2024. Following pressure from the Free Speech Union last year, Police changed the subjective threshold for hate perception, and have entirely abandoned subjective 'non-criminal hate incidents' as a category. These are important steps to ensure Police remain focused on actions, not thought, and retain the trust of the community, says Jonathan Ayling, Chief Executive of the Free Speech Union. 'Training previously released by Police to 'recognise, record, and respond' to 'hate speech and hate crime' was a reckless path to pursue. We applaud Police's willingness to acknowledge the unavoidable weaknesses of subjective thresholds for hate, and their decision to change the training they implemented, and to abandon subjective non-criminal hate incidents (NCHIs). 'However, at a recent meeting between Police and the Free Speech Union, we were told it was not possible for Police to correct the data that had been collected while the subjective threshold for 'hate' was in place. This meant Police were choosing to keep records of Kiwis linked to subjective 'hate incidents', even though those incidents no longer matched the Police's own definition of 'hate incidents'. And these Kiwis may not even have known about this. 'Under the previous threshold, as many as 100 flags a month were applied to individual's records held by Police for perceived hate. Once the subjective threshold was removed, this dropped to two or three a month – some months with none at all. This clearly demonstrates how worthless these subjective flags were. The Free Speech Union insisted Police had no place retaining this data that had no value to them, and that could easily be weaponised. 'Police are right to commit to taking steps necessary to remove these misleading flags from profiles over coming months, and to reject perception-based tests for questions as unavoidably subjective as 'hate'.'
