NEWSTALK ZB: COMFORTING THE COMFORTABLE

 

In a healthy democracy, media outlets should challenge those in power, scrutinise policy, and provide space for a diversity of perspectives. Newstalk ZB doesn't do any of these things.

NEWSTALK ZB has become the country’s most polished echo chamber. Day after day, its presenters deliver a steady diet of conservative politics dressed up as 'straight talk'. Mike Hosking in the mornings and Heather du Plessis-Allan in the evenings are the station’s twin pillars, and both have perfected the art of turning government spin into common sense while ridiculing the opposition as hopeless, naive, or dangerous.  

Mike Hosking’s breakfast show is the clearest example. His breakfast show is less about holding power to account than about reinforcing the legitimacy of those already in power, particularly when they lean to the right. Ministers are ushered in for friendly chats, their policies framed as pragmatic or inevitable. Opposition figures, by contrast, are treated with disdain. The performance is predictable but effective: listeners are reassured, even in the midst of an ongoing economic crisis, that the government is on the right track. And alternatives are dismissed out of hand before they can be taken seriously.

Heather Du Plessis-Allan carries the baton into drive time, her commentary invariably combative, reliably hostile to progressive politics. Whether the subject is climate action, welfare reform, or Maori sovereignty, her framing aligns with conservative orthodoxy. She claims to speak for ordinary New Zealanders', but the ordinary she invokes is a narrow slice of the population: older, wealthier, and resistant to change. And predominantly male.

But this is not just about individual personalities. Newstalk ZB is owned by NZME, a corporate media conglomerate whose business model depends on delivering audiences to advertisers. The station’s politics are therefore not only ideological but commercial. By pandering to a conservative demographic, it ensures loyalty, ratings, and revenue. Conservative content attracts a conservative audience, which demands more conservative content. The cycle is self-reinforcing.  

The result is what can only be described as an echo station. Listeners hear the same ideological notes struck day after day, creating the illusion of consensus while shutting out dissent. Opposition parties like Labour, the Greens, and Te Pati Maori are routinely cast as incompetent or dangerous. Their policies are not treated as legitimate alternatives but as threats to stability and prosperity. This asymmetry matters. Radio remains one of the most accessible sources of news for many New Zealanders, particularly outside the major cities. When opposition voices are consistently undermined, it shapes public perception in ways that ripple through polling, elections, and the wider political culture.  

The broader consequence is a narrowing of public debate. Issues like inequality, climate justice, or public ownership rarely receive serious engagement on Newstalk ZB. When they are mentioned, it is usually to dismiss them as unrealistic or radical. In a healthy democracy, media outlets should challenge those in power, scrutinise policy, and provide space for a diversity of perspectives. Newstalk ZB does the opposite. It comforts the comfortable and afflicts the opposition.  It is less a watchdog than a lapdog, wagging its tail for the government of the day so long as that government aligns with its audience’s conservative preferences.

Because of its dominance, the station’s framing seeps into the wider media ecosystem. Journalists at other outlets feel compelled to respond to its narratives, while politicians tailor their messaging to avoid being mauled on air.  In some cases, politicians have refused to play ball: Te Pati Maori continues to boycott Newstalk ZB while former Labour Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern decided to quit her weekly interview with a hostile Mike Hosking. In contrast, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon continues to be warmly embraced by him.

For those committed to a more democratic and egalitarian New Zealand, the task is to puncture the corporate media echo chamber. That means exposing the biases of stations like Newstalk ZB, supporting independent media, and insisting that public debate cannot be left in the hands of corporate broadcasters whose bottom line depends on pandering to conservatism.  

Some argue for stronger regulation or greater public funding of alternatives; others believe the left must build its own platforms capable of reaching audiences with the same immediacy and emotional punch as talk radio. What is clear is that leaving the field to Newstalk ZB is not an option.  

Newstalk ZB’s formula is profitable for NZME and comforting for its audience. But for the health of New Zealand’s democracy, it is a formula that must be challenged.