A major shareholder revolt is underway at NZME with a coalition of investors moving to remove the company’s board.
The move, which is being portrayed by legacy media outlets as a corporate takeover, is instead being framed by its proponents as an effort to restore commercial viability and journalistic balance to the country’s largest media group.
Sean Plunket host of The Platform provided his perspective on the unfolding situation arguing that the mainstream narrative on the shareholder action is misleading.
“This is not a billionaire takeover”, Plunket said. “This is a group of shareholders including resident billionaire Jim Grennan taking a stand against what they see as ideological bias within NZME.”
NZME owns The New Zealand Herald, Newstalk ZB and several other major legacy media outlets.
According to Plunket the shareholders behind the push for change are frustrated by what they describe as an increasing reluctance within NZME to accept advertising from perspectives that do not align with a progressive or woke worldview.
“The current board has allowed ideological bias to dictate editorial and business decisions,” Plunket claimed. “By refusing ads they disagree with politically they have cost the company revenue and now the owners have had enough.”
The shareholder-led upheaval is expected to result in the removal of nearly the entire board and could trigger major changes in management and editorial leadership at the Herald.
Plunket speculated that some prominent editorial voices may be on the way out predicting that columnists like Shaneel Lal and journalists such as David Fisher could be among those affected. He also suggested that NZME’s chair Barbara Chapman who has ties to “diversity and inclusion initiatives” may have contributed to what he calls a DEI-infected culture at the media company.
“This isn’t illegal or sinister”, Plunket emphasised. “It’s simply shareholders asserting their rights over a company they own. They are demanding a return to commercial success through proper journalism rather than pushing ideological narratives.”
The developments at NZME come amid broader discussions about the state of New Zealand’s media landscape with critics arguing that mainstream outlets have become too politically aligned. Plunket suggested that Stuff another major media company has also leaned into progressive narratives at the cost of journalistic integrity.
“This is about whether media serves the public fairly or whether it operates as an extension of government or activist-driven narratives”, he said.
He also noted that figures such as former broadcasting minister Willie Jackson have voiced concerns about the changes calling the shake-up terrible. However, Plunket dismissed these criticisms as coming from those who benefited from the status quo.
As shareholders move to install a new board there are questions about the fate of NZME’s CEO Michael Boggs who reportedly earns around $3 million a year. Plunket speculated that he may not survive the transition.
NZME
Winnie DEI bill
resignations left, right and center
awakening around the globe
and The Storm rides into Godzone on 5eyes NSA data wings
love if I could make a poem out of that
This move is likely too late, the brands are corrupted beyond repair, probably should be looking to off load NZME shares and let it sink into oblivion, and rebrand phoenix like from the ashes.
I was thinking the same. The wokeness has driven people like me away and I have formed habits of getting my information elsewhere. I will never watch the tv ever again also. It’s dead to me.
From a business perspective, I would agree with you after reading something on the rnz.co.nz a few minutes ago which said “NZME currently has about 150,000 subscribers paying for news and a target of 190,000 by 2026”.
If these mugs want to pay NZME for bullmanure then the previously respectable NZ Herald brand is well and truly munted today.
I reckon the smart business approach now would be to own multiple brands. For example, Foodstuffs owns multiple brands like paknslave, new world, 4square etc
Similarly the same media operator can own multiple brands too. NZ Herald is the appropriate brand for the brainless woke and the moronic shrinks and drug-suppliers who support them. While those of us who want real news are probably sufficiently resourceful to find it in other brands. We don’t necessarily need any revolution or takeover at NZME.
tried advertising with them, they rejected the content, went with smaller opposition for same money instead, got far better value in the end.
Great stuff. Yes imagine turning away full page ads in the herald because they are woke. Go woke go broke. It really is true.
Let the blood letting begin
Former broadcasting minister Willie Jackson – some sort of joke?
But like has been mentioned it is probably too late to resurrect this rusting hulk
You cannot polish a turd nor put lipstick on a pig
Shareholders should have acted sooner to rescue what is now a lost cause
And who really gives a tinkers toss
Woke isn’t the right word.
Refusal to report the truth about vaccine harm and excess death rates, prosecuting our Liz Gunn and Barry Young for reporting the truth. That bit isn’t woke. To cover up mass murder is an accessory to murder.
It is not just the media, it is the police, it is the politicians, the judges, Government departments.
Not tuning into media that chooses a script from their masters isn’t woke. It is deceiving the public. Even worse, its a government funded lie.
The media aligned itself with the government and are the new Pravda but take note that this shareholder revolt only happened when the government funding started to dry up, there was no revolt when the jacinda bucks were flowing.
NZME is just restructuring to increase their revenue, not nessarsarily evicting the Woke.
I suggested to Michael Boggs he should get rid of Richard Arnold (voice from America) a known Democrat sympathiser from the Hoskins show. His biased propaganda is outrageous. Boggs response. “While Arnold can be polarising we have no intention of dropping him”
What about Paul spoonley, Robert patman Michael baker, Ashley church and Cameron bagrie. Sick of hearing from these biased people pushing their own barrow. Oh and that stupid woman pertussis Harris who received funding from pfizer and said she didn’t. Go find some actual unbiased experts.
Thank god it has been so long since I have listened to the channel that I dont recognise any of those names anymore.
Why did it take so dam long? How did they not see this was wrong? All the rats jumping ship instead of critical thinking, I just don’t get it starting with the criminal propaganda of the murdering jabs…
No body reads mainstream media anyway coz media helped destroy NZ – six fn years!!!
Actually I take that back, all my 60 years of life…
They dont care about right and wrong, just profit, this revolt only happened when the Jacinda bucks dried up, nothing will change but the faces.
Why would I believe anything or trust anything? I think all journalism is bullmanure until proven otherwise. Genuine media independence is an archaic and redundant fiction. NZME is not the only problem and it’s wise for anyone to scrutinise all media including DTNZ through the same lens. It’s prudent for me to assume that all narratives are misleading until proven otherwise. As explained below, there’s lots of bull from Sean Plunket but also one useful gem to aid my understanding.
Everything is “politically aligned” with “ideological bias” and everything contains “ideological narratives” as there’s no such thing as “journalistic integrity” or “proper journalism”. These are all euphemisms for genuine bullmanure. It’s always been up to me to get my own information from multiple sources and reach my own conclusions.
The useful gem from Sean Plunket identifies commercial profit as the primary motive for the existence of media – and not media independence or “journalistic integrity” which remain fiction. So they’ll dish out all sorts of bullmanure to ensure they make a profit but they claim it’s a dumb idea to be ideological. Do they forget that the focus on profit is also ideological? But it’s just a different ideology. They obviously continue to expect their readers to be either thick or stupid but with a different thickness and a different stupidity.
How is such profit made? Again from another useful gem from Sean Plunket who says “by refusing ads they disagree with politically they have cost the company revenue” and the shareholders are “demanding a return to commercial success….”
To generate their profits, they capture, monetize, then sell our attention – by telling us what we want to hear, rather than by telling us the truth. This won’t change after the takeover of NZME. Only the ideology will change. And so their audience and perception will change and they’ll hope to make better profits out of their new future audience.
While I personally think that’s a good thing, I’ll continue to trust nobody. And there’s no change to my attitude to media.
I hope Jim Grennan reads your comment.
And I hope he is one of the few rich and happy dudes (yep, like Musk) who ‘invests’ into platforms to really get it to what it should do. It really did a lot to me what Elon did with Twatter/X.
I’d help Jimmy carry the kitchen sink into NZME halls.
With all due respect to Sean Plunket.
Plunket is clearly a repugnant ignorant obnoxious opinionated retarded bloated uninformed untrustworthy twisted gnome.
Just an obvious observation obviously.
However, he is unusually correct regarding the demise of NZME.
True and how many parents are teaching their children those habits? most/many I hope.
Sean Plunket is obviously retarded.
Just ignore him.
Billionaires are fine with it until they lose money lol.
Where have they been this whole time?
‘s that you Barbara Chappi?
Lal or fishy? Naaa, too stuck in themselves