spinofflive
a melon coloured background with earbud wires coming out of a phone displaying the RNZ app. the wires are shaped sort of like a questionmark, and in the corener there is a logo form the betcha website, a gambling platform.
RNZ podcasts on third party apps have been displaying ads (Image: The Spinoff)

MediaSeptember 26, 2024

Why were gambling ads running during RNZ podcasts?

a melon coloured background with earbud wires coming out of a phone displaying the RNZ app. the wires are shaped sort of like a questionmark, and in the corener there is a logo form the betcha website, a gambling platform.
RNZ podcasts on third party apps have been displaying ads (Image: The Spinoff)

The broadcaster is strictly non-commercial – yet ads, including for a TAB subsidiary, have been appearing on its podcasts. Shanti Mathias investigates. 

“I was listening to a longform interview with Lisa Reihana about installing her art in Singapore, then there was a jarring cut to a laddish ad for a gambling site – it was such a juxtaposition, it just doesn’t fit with the show,” says Joseph, a fan of the Culture 101 RNZ show, which talks to artists about their work. Last Sunday, he was listening on Apple Podcasts; like most RNZ productions, the show’s interviews are portioned into individual podcast episodes and loaded on to podcast platforms like Apple and Spotify. The ad, for the younger-people focused TAB subsidiary betcha, seemed out of place, as did ads on an RNZ podcast at all. “They don’t have ads on RNZ usually, because being a non-commercial station is part of its character, so I thought it was weird that they had ads on their podcasts,” Joseph says. 

On being contacted by The Spinoff, RNZ said the gambling ads should not have aired during its podcasts, and did so due to an error on the podcast provider’s part.

Most adblockers don’t stop podcast advertising – making it attractive to businesses as their ads are hard to skip or ignore. The podcast advertising market was valued at $US10.9bn in 2022, and is expected to keep growing as audiences increase for the audio medium. 

Joseph has been hearing ads on RNZ podcasts for a while, mostly for perennial podcast sponsors like digital therapy offering BetterHelp. But because he often listens to RNZ shows, like Culture 101 and Charlotte Ryan’s Music 101, alongside podcasts from other providers, it took a while for him to realise that the ads he was hearing were actually on RNZ products, not from the start of the next show. “One podcast can kind of blur into the other,” the dedicated listener says. 

Gambling ads have been frequent lately, he says, with the TAB launching the “Get Your Bet On” campaign in June and sponsoring the Game of 2 Halves reboot, while overseas gambling companies can take advantage of New Zealand’s minimal requirements around digital advertising. Joseph has certainly been hearing a lot of TAB ads, “maybe because I watch lots of sports coverage, and I’m a man in my 30s with disposable income”. 

While third-party ads are placed automatically, and somewhat targeted to the user, the person uploading the podcast can choose to exclude categories of advertising, as this page on Spotify explains. An RNZ spokesperson told The Spinoff that after being made aware of Joseph’s experience, the organisation confirmed that gambling advertising was already turned off in its podcast distributor, as is lottery advertising. The issue was with the podcast distributor allowing gambling ads to be placed, not with the public broadcaster allowing these ads in the first place. “We will be following up urgently with the provider using the information you’ve provided about this,” they said. 

an asian woman with a fringe and a smile stands in front of a beach background, with sandy coloured tussocks and the flat turquoise horizon of the sea
Perlina Lau is one of the hosts of Culture 101 (Image: Celebrity Treasure Island)

But the advertisement Joseph heard during an RNZ show wasn’t a one-off; after interviewing Joseph, this reporter also heard an ad for betcha while listening to the excellent RNZ podcast Nellie’s Baby, about the life of a woman institutionalised in Porirua Hospital, on podcast platform PocketCasts. Joseph doesn’t feel upset about the ad, and certainly plans to continue listening to Culture 101 – he was just confused about why it happened. 

One aspect of the RNZ Charter is that the public media organisation must “ensure that it is not influenced by the commercial interests of other parties”. It must also “provide its services in a commercial-free manner”, “whether or not the delivery platforms are free to access”. Commercial-free means “free to access and without advertising or sponsorship” and delivery platform means “any method of transmitting audio, visual or audiovisual content”. RNZ must “exhibit a sense of social responsibility” by “having regard to the interests of the community in which it operates.” 

By this measure, podcast platforms, free to use via RSS feeds, are “delivery platforms”. While RNZ emphasises that all podcasts on RNZ platforms (its website, app or on the radio) are ad-free, for many people, podcast providers will be the default place to engage with podcasts. RNZ’s chief content officer Megan Whelan told The Spinoff that some small commercial activities were permitted under the RNZ charter, “the famous RNZ cookbook being one such example”. While this may be the case, a cookbook sold in bookshops is clearly a completely different type of “commercial activity” than an advertisement integrated with a podcast. 

Advertising gambling on RNZ products, specifically, appears to blatantly contravene the “social responsibility” aspect of the RNZ charter. Gambling is widely considered to cause social harm, as RNZ has reported on

RNZ CEO Paul Thompson (Photo: Supplied)

Ads have run on RNZ podcasts playing on third-party platforms, like Apple Podcasts or Spotify, since 2019. That isn’t all podcasts; discretion is applied. “There are no ads on news or podcasts for children at this time,” Whelan said. The amount of money gained is small, and put back into podcast production. “For context, it’s about 0.00047% of the RNZ annual budget, akin to thousands of dollars rather than tens of thousands each year.” Given that the amount of revenue is so small, it’s hard to understand why the public broadcaster bothers switching the ads on at all.

The harm caused by gambling means that its advertising is highly regulated. The Advertising Standards Authority has a Gambling Advertising Code which deals with general principles, such as that it shouldn’t be targeted at children, and the Department of Internal Affairs deals with gambling advertising that doesn’t meet legal requirements. 

RNZ’s focus on podcasts means that playing shows on third-party apps (with advertising) is firmly in place. Tim Watkin, executive producer of podcasts on RNZ, told the Public Media Alliance in 2022 that producing podcasts with smaller producers or specific communities in mind was a key  “There’s a public good element of getting these stories out to our wide audience.” The organisation, which RNZ is a member of, has also pointed to RNZ’s The Detail as an example of how “podcasts are now an essential and established part of a public broadcaster’s response to news.” 

RNZ emphasises that the gambling ads shouldn’t have been there, but it’s not clear why it happened. Perhaps the betcha ad had simply not been properly identified by the podcast platform. Nonetheless, the reality of widespread podcast advertising, targeted to individual users, makes the gambling regulations hard to enforce. If a child is using a parent’s device, for instance, they could easily be exposed to advertising targeting their parents. Hilary Souter, the chief executive of the ASA, said that podcast advertising would depend on the podcast content – if the host appeals to under-18s, the Complaints Board would consider this factor if a code had been breached. Ultimately, the advertisers themselves are also responsible for considering the audience to which they’re marketing.

“RNZ’s commitment to being commercial-free and independent is as strong as ever,” Whelan said, when asked about the ads on RNZ products. Nonetheless, there’s space in their podcast feeds for other companies’ commercial incentives to creep in.

The TAB did not respond to a request for comment. 

9.40am, September 26: This story was updated to place greater emphasis on RNZ saying the gambling ads appeared due to an error on the third-party provider’s account, and should not have been allowed.

‘Hutt Valley, Kāpiti, down to the south coast. Our Wellington coverage is powered by members.’
Joel MacManus
— Wellington editor
Keep going!
FeatureImage_MatthewHooton.png

MediaSeptember 24, 2024

Matthew Hooton, Don Brash and the defamation drama behind a deleted podcast 

FeatureImage_MatthewHooton.png

An astonishing monologue from the centre right commentator electrified audiences – then Don Brash called in the lawyers. Now updated with the text of Hooton’s apology at the foot.

The video lasts a little over four minutes, part of an episode of The Working Group politics podcast, which invites those with polarised views to debate them live. Matthew Hooton, the former National Party staffer turned lobbyist and commentator, sits casually, one arm draped across the back of a black office chair. He shifts and straightens in his seat, and commences a political tirade for the ages, targeted squarely at former National Party leader Don Brash, and his advocacy group Hobson’s Pledge. 

“Hobson stuttered somehow to the Māoris when he was signing [Te Tiriti],” says Hooton, referencing the “pledge” Brash’s group is named for. “He said in te reo, ‘we are all one people’, apparently. Now I don’t know whether Hobson said that or not, but it’s not in the text, and so it seems quite pathetic.” 

Hooton is clearly wound up, gesticulating with force as he delivers a monologue railing against his former colleague. It goes on, and on, rising in fury, a trickle becoming a torrent which will not be tamed or diverted. At one point co-host Damien Grant attempts to intervene, and gets called a “dickhead” for his troubles. 

Hooton claims that he, in his former role within the party, installed Brash as leader of National, and refers to Brash’s infamous Ōrewa speech as “despicably racist”, before rounding into the core of his thesis. “He is a fundamentally bad person,” Hooton says of Brash. “He’s divided this country for no apparent reason, despite being certainly intelligent enough to know the things that he says are not true.”

Hooton goes on to say that “all it has ever been about is for a group of people to try and position [Māori] people as radicals and the ‘other’, and somehow dangerous to the mainstream. And that has always been a lie.” He concludes by suggesting Brash has knowingly lied about his own views – a very serious allegation. That’s what made the video so powerful. And where the trouble started.

Matthew Hooton (Photo: Tina Tiller / The Spinoff)

Thousands have viewed the clip, and it has been widely circulated on social media in the month since its publication, with many who might not usually be fans of Hooton’s perspectives, celebrating its sentiment. However after racking up almost 10,000 views on YouTube in 48 hours, it vanished from The Working Group podcast’s official channels and social feeds. 

This is because Brash considered the implication that he was insincere in his beliefs highly defamatory, and has “retained specialist counsel”, according to his lawyer, former Act MP Stephen Franks. A letter laying out Brash’s position was sent to Hooton and The Working Group.

When contacted by The Spinoff, Brash made it clear that his defamation claim concerned only one aspect of Hooton’s comments. “I mean calling someone a racist these days is almost fashionable. It’s become so common. I do resent that, and deeply resent that, but when he claims that I was promoting a view which I simply don’t agree with, don’t believe in myself – I mean, that is quite preposterous.” 

A podcast comfortable causing offence

It’s not surprising that the incident happened on The Working Group. The podcast is the lovechild of staunch old school leftist and Daily Blog editor Martyn “Bomber” Bradbury and the libertarian liquidator and Stuff columnist Damien Grant. It has become popular in recent years due to its bombastic style and embrace of a combative argument across the political aisle, with a broad cross-section of views represented in guests ranging from Chris Hipkins and Simon Wilson to Jordan Williams and Leo Molloy. Its intro jokes about “avoiding defamation” – something it may not have lived up to in the episode from late August.

Along with pulling the recording, the letter seems to have already prompted some level of retreat from Hooton, according to sources familiar with the situation. That may not be enough to mollify Brash. “Notwithstanding an apology being suggested by Matthew Hooton,” wrote Franks, “proceedings are likely to ensue.” When approached, Hooton said via text “it’s best not to inflame or aggravate matters, I think” and refused to comment further. Sources familiar with the situation suggest he intends to apologise for the comments during this evening’s recording of The Working Group. 

Don Brash (Getty Images)

Brash told The Spinoff in a pair of interviews that his legal issue was solely with Hooton’s persistent attacks on his integrity. “He didn’t suggest I was wrong. He suggested I was lying, and knew I was lying.” Despite his persistent positioning as a champion of free speech and opponent of cancel culture, Brash considered that aspect of the podcast a bridge too far. 

“I’m in favour of freedom of speech, but it’s one thing to believe in freedom of speech, another thing to accuse someone of flat out lying. That’s what Hooton has done… I don’t think that’s inconsistent with a belief in freedom of speech.”

What we can and can’t say

Reporting on defamation is complicated within New Zealand, as the law can consider reporting on claims to be repeating them, and therefore engaging in defamation too. In an email to The Spinoff, Franks said “it would be inadvisable for the Spinoff to repeat the defamatory comments”. However, The Spinoff specifically asked Brash for permission to repeat the claims in the context of our reporting, and he agreed, on the basis that we underline the fact that Brash forcefully rejects Hooton’s statements about the sincerity of his beliefs.

Brash is not the only object of Hooton’s derision in the fateful episode – he expands the scope to include the Act Party, a former client of Hooton’s, and its Treaty Principles Bill. “David Seymour cannot possibly believe that his racist Treaty Principles Bill reflects in any way whatsoever either the texts or the case law over the Treaty of Waitangi. He isn’t that stupid,” Hooton says on the podcast. “He’s doing it to inflame hatred in New Zealand.”

When contacted by The Spinoff, Seymour said he had not heard Hooton’s comment, but after it was relayed to him, confirmed he had no interest in joining Brash in any defamation proceeding (and, indeed, Seymour intends to appear on The Working Group again soon). “I always take Matthew with a large grain of salt. On his best day, he’s scintillatingly brilliant. And then there’s the days when he’s getting sued by Steven Joyce, or is adamant Todd Muller will be the best prime minister New Zealand has ever had. The trick with Matthew is to take the gems for their considerable worth, and be able to tell when he’s having one of his off days.”

‘Media is under threat. Help save The Spinoff with an ongoing commitment to support our work.’
Duncan Greive
— Founder

As Seymour said, this incident is not Hooton’s first time testing the limits of defamation law. In 2018 he wrote a column for the National Business Review concerning former National finance minister Steven Joyce, before ultimately apologising for it as part of a settlement in which he agreed to pay Joyce’s legal fees. The NBR did not concede, and the saga dragged on for years, ultimately leading to a judgement in the publication’s favour. 

The divide there ran deep, but so does the ill feeling between Brash and Hooton. Based on Franks’ statements, there’s nothing to suggest this episode is likely to end with an apology. It reveals a vast rift between two major figures within rightwing politics, and suggests that there is no consensus about the persistent campaign against the treaty and other gains for te ao Māori within some parts of the right. These two one-time collaborators are now bitterly divided, and while the podcast is gone, the enmity lingers.

Update, 7.30pm, September 24: an apology, read by Martyn Bradbury on The Working Group and livestreamed on its YouTube channel:

Four weeks ago on The Working Group, Matthew made certain comments about Dr Brash. These comments were made in discussions with Damien and others about the role of the Treaty of Waitangi in New Zealand, the foreshore and seabed issue, and the advocacy group Hobson’s Pledge. In his comments, Matthew accused Dr Brash of dishonesty and of advocating his views solely to drive racial division in New Zealand. 

Matthew accepts that in fact Dr Brash holds those views sincerely and not for the reasons Matthew gave. 

Matthew does not agree with Dr Brash’s position on the Treaty and related matters. His remarks came as part of a vigorous debate on a subject that he is particularly passionate about – as are many New Zealanders, including Dr Brash. But Matthew accepts he was not justified in making – and sincerely apologises for – those particular statements, which he unreservedly retracts.

_______

But wait there's more!