MEDIAWATCH: Why the BSA complaint against Sean Plunket is such a waste of time
The Sean Plunket BSA complaint looks serious on paper, but that’s exactly the problem — it wastes energy on the most minor part of a much uglier broadcasting culture while sidestepping the bigger rot underneath.
New Zealand’s under-fire broadcasting watchdog has accepted new complaints against The Platform and Sean Plunket, but the defiant host says he won’t be co-operating with its investigation.
In correspondence to Plunket late on Friday afternoon, the BSA outlined two complaints from the same person – an original complaint from July about Plunket’s description of Māori tikanga as “mumbo jumbo” and new correspondence, covering complaints about two new and separate broadcasts, in October.
The new complaints stem from comments and criticism broadcast by The Platform and Plunket about the complainant himself.
The BSA has requested the three recordings (including the original) from Plunket by the end of Wednesday, and a formal response to the complaints by 4 May 2026.
Pinging Sean over this misses the real problem
This is such a waste of time.
It is an insult to our collective intelligence that Sean should be pinged for saying Māori culture is ‘mumbo jumbo’ when Sean has said far more insulting and hateful things than that!
Calling Māori culture ‘mumbo jumbo’ is the sort of thing your Uncle who has a Reality Check Radio subscription and never gets invited to Christmas lunch says.
It’s a garden variety bigotry that is so pathetic it should be given the contempt it deserves by being ignored.
Māori culture has more mana and power to ever be impacted by what a snotty little alt-right boy whose last career height was 2010 has to say.
So, it’s a farce to ping him on calling Māori culture ‘mumbo jumbo’!
Plunket is a radioactive hate grifter who has in the past attempted to claim images of starving Gazans were faked, has claimed Māui dolphins were “the Down syndrome kids of marine mammals” that “deserved to die”, has asked if anyone felt sorry for Harvey Weinstein and infamously claimed he was concerned about a mass outbreak of anorexia in Gaza.
And let’s not forget these great moments:
On 12 April 2023, Plunket claimed on The Platform that former Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern had been hiding her new speaking engagement from the public. After Ardern and The Spinoff confirmed the speaking engagement story was false, Plunket apologised and removed references to the fake Ardern ad from his and The Platform’s social media. He also encouraged his followers to delete any mentions of it as well.[37]
In September 2023, Plunket claimed on The Platform that there were rumours that the media company Stuff had received financial support from the Māori iwi (tribe) Ngāi Tahu, which he claimed contributed to Stuff’s alleged embrace of wokeness and critical race theory. Plunket’s claims were disputed by Stuff’s owner Sinead Boucher, who stated that the company did not have a financial relationship with Ngāi Tahu and suggested that the rumours were motivated by misogyny.[38]
Pinging Sean on calling Tikanga, ‘Mumbo Jumbo’ is like arresting Pol Pot for jaywalking. Not because it isn’t offensive — but because it’s nowhere near the worst of what’s been said.
Of course this is broadcasting
The second issue is the definition itself. Of course Sean is broadcasting, he’s just doing it online so the act probably should extend to him in an age of disinformation and misinformation.
The third issue is the insane overreach by the woke coven of the BSA itself. Not in extending their reach into digital, but in taking this bullshit complaint in the first place!
The BSA are a group of noddy do-gooders who are picking the weakest bullshit to try and pull Sean up on.
It’s a weak complaint that distracts from far more serious issues around media standards.
So what is the BSA really chasing here?
The biggest reason this is garbage is because the whole thing is not about protecting anyone from Sean’s ‘free speech’, it’s about finding new funding for the BSA!
Levies expected to decrease
The Broadcasting Standards Authority has pointed to challenges in the traditional media landscape as being behind its expectation for revenue from broadcasting levies to follow a downward trajectory.
Freeview is about to be killed, when that happens, what the hell will the BSA rule over?
Radio frequencies and Sky?
The BSA gets part of its revenue from the broadcasters paying levies, if Freeview goes, that’s a lot of revenue the BSA won’t have.
Redefining transmission allows the BSA to take over online broadcasting, and the only question from their point of view now is how do you levy that online broadcast?
One argument will be based on revenue, another argument will be on how many are viewing the content.
This has bugger all to do with ‘broadcasting standards’ and everything to do with finding a new revenue stream once Freeview is switched off.
So:
- I think the BSA are right to extend their oversight into online broadcasts
- I think they are totally wrong on taking this ridiculous complaint when Sean has said things 10,000 times more radioactive and offensive.
- I believe ultimately this is about the BSA finding new revenue streams to be relevant which will be a moot point if the BSA is shut down altogether.
I have a feeling Plunker is too poor and too stupid to have retained his last 6 months of broadcasts.
Which is a requirement for broadcasters…
Which Plunker and the Platform called themselves until the BSA came calling…
Now he calls himself what? Sad old opinion haver? Spaz with a microphone? Boomer podcaster?