GODZONE: Jesus wept.
Another Anglosphere Five Eyes (FVEY) counterpart has fallen
We all know England has fallen. So too, has Godzone.
New Zealand, one of our favorite countries we’ve visited over the last few years, has fallen to the woke-rainbow-ideology, and its dying mainstream legacy media.
On a day when answers should’ve been given, New Zealanders were left seething with rage at the blatant two-tier system, that is, the government funded ‘news’ media. Green Party MP Benjamin Cody Doyle held a press conference in the ‘Rainbow Room’ at New Zealand’s Parliamentary Headquarters, where he did nothing but gaslight the New Zealand public.
Our goal here, in this piece, is to highlight the apparent hypocrisy in the New Zealand media's framing of Benjamin Cody Doyle as a victim, while the core issue—his potentially inappropriate behavior involving the sexualization of a minor—seems to be downplayed or sidestepped.
To do that, we’re going to look at three source links.
1. Stuff.co.nz Article: "Live: Green MP Benjamin Doyle dismisses social media controversy as ‘baseless, personal’ attack" (April 2025)
The Stuff.co.nz article provides Doyle’s perspective and the Green Party’s response to the controversy, framing it within a broader political context.
Key Points from the Article:
Doyle’s Defense: Doyle dismisses the controversy as a "baseless, personal attack," claiming that the term "Bussy" was a personal nickname and not intended to have a sexual meaning in the context of his posts. He admits to "political naivety" in not deleting the posts earlier but insists he has done nothing wrong.
Green Party’s Stance: Green Party co-leader Marama Davidson emphasizes the "immense number of death threats and abuse" directed at Doyle and his child, linking these to the online backlash. She frames the criticism as an attack on Doyle’s identity as a queer parent, rather than a legitimate concern about the posts.
Media Framing: The article focuses heavily on the threats and harassment Doyle has faced, positioning him as a victim of a coordinated online campaign. It briefly mentions the content of the posts but does not delve deeply into their implications, particularly the caption "bussy galore" alongside a photo of a child.
Political Context: The article notes that Prime Minister Christopher Luxon called the posts "inappropriate" but condemned threats of violence, while Peters called for an investigation into Doyle.
Tone and Framing: The article adopts a sympathetic tone toward Doyle, emphasizing the threats and harassment over the content of the posts. By focusing on the backlash, it shifts the narrative away from the potential harm or inappropriateness of the posts themselves, particularly the use of a sexually charged term in connection with a child. The mention of Doyle’s identity as a queer parent is used to contextualize the attacks as potentially transphobic or homophobic, which aligns with the Green Party’s defense strategy.
2. Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters’ X Post (April 9, 2025)
Winston Peters’ post on X directly addresses the Green Party’s handling of the situation and accuses them of hypocrisy:
Key Points from Peters’ Post:
Peters questions why the Green Party instructed Doyle to remove his posts when he was a candidate, but later defended those same posts in the media, despite initially labeling them "problematic."
He emphasizes that the issue with the posts is their content, not Doyle’s identity or sexuality, and accuses the Green Party and Doyle of "hiding behind the rainbow community" to deflect criticism.
Peters rejects the narrative of Doyle as a victim, calling it a "flimsy excuse" and asserting that the real issue is accountability for the problematic content.
Tone and Intent: Peters’ tone is confrontational and critical, aiming to hold both Doyle and the Green Party accountable. He frames the situation as a failure of responsibility, particularly highlighting the Green Party’s inconsistent stance on the posts. His mention of the rainbow community suggests that he believes the Green Party is using Doyle’s identity as a shield against legitimate criticism, which he sees as a distraction from the core issue: the content of the posts themselves.
Public Reaction (from Replies): The replies to Peters’ post reveal a polarized public response:
Some users, like (@)PowderPuffPlay and (@)OConnorGreg, agree with Peters, arguing that Doyle’s lack of accountability makes him unfit to be an MP and calling for his removal.
Others, like (@)nickarockel, defend Doyle, suggesting that the controversy stems from poor judgment rather than malicious intent, and that the attacks on Doyle are excessive.
More critical voices, such as (@)InARsWeTrustt, explicitly label Doyle as a "nonce" (a slang term for a pedophile) and focus on the "kids part" of the controversy, not his sexuality.
(@)VuocoloRiz brings up an unrelated accusation against Peters’ coalition partner, attempting to shift the narrative and question Peters’ credibility.
3. George News Article: "NZ Media Silence is Deafening: Is the Green Party MP a Predator or a Victim?" (April 2025)
Our piece takes a more critical stance, questioning the media’s response and delving into the specifics of the controversy.
Key Points from the Article:
Details of the Posts: The article highlights the Instagram post with the caption "bussy galore," noting that it featured a photo of Doyle with a child. It also mentions that 52 images were deleted from the (@)BibleBeltBussy
account after the controversy broke, raising questions about transparency.
Media Hypocrisy: The piece accuses New Zealand’s mainstream media (Stuff, RNZ, NZ Herald) of closing ranks to protect Doyle, running "near-identical coverage" that frames him as a victim of online harassment rather than addressing the content of the posts. It argues that a National or ACT MP would face far harsher scrutiny for similar behavior, pointing to a double standard.
Public and Political Reaction: The article notes that Winston Peters and others have called for accountability, while the Green Party and media have focused on the threats against Doyle. It questions whether the Green Party’s defense of the caption as "absurdist queer expression" (as stated by co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick) is a genuine explanation or a deflection.
Core Concern: The piece emphasizes that the real issue is the potential sexualization of a child through the use of the term "bussy," which it describes as having "clear sexual undertones." It argues that the media’s focus on Doyle’s victimhood distracts from this critical concern.
Tone and Framing: The George News article is highly critical of both the Green Party and the media, framing the situation as a cover-up. It prioritizes the content of the posts and their implications over the threats against Doyle, arguing that the latter should not overshadow the former. The piece also questions Doyle’s suitability as an MP, echoing sentiments from Peters and many X users.
4. Additional Context
Here’s further context on the timeline and specifics of the controversy:
NZ Herald (March 31, 2025): Confirms the details of the "bussy galore" post and notes that Prime Minister Luxon called the comments "inappropriate," while Peters called for an investigation.
Centrist.nz (April 5, 2025): Highlights the coordinated media response, noting that Stuff, RNZ, and the NZ Herald published similar stories focusing on the backlash rather than the posts. It also mentions Marama Davidson’s claim of death threats, but questions the timing and transparency of this narrative.
The Daily Blog: Takes a more neutral stance, acknowledging that the posts are a "bad look" for the Greens but questioning the validity of Peters’ attacks. It also notes that right-wing trolls have taken the captions out of context to insinuate sinister intent.
NZ Herald (April 9, 2025): Reports Doyle’s return to Parliament, where he reiterates that the posts had no sexual meaning and admits to political naivety. It also mentions the death threats that kept him away from Parliament.
Hypocrisy in the New Zealand Media’s Response
The New Zealand media’s handling of this controversy reveals a significant double standard, as highlighted by the George News article and echoed in Winston Peters’ X post and public sentiment on X. Here’s a detailed breakdown of the hypocrisy:
Framing Doyle as a Victim Over Addressing the Core Issue:
Media Narrative: Outlets like Stuff.co.nz, RNZ, and the NZ Herald have consistently focused on the threats and harassment Doyle has faced, framing him as a victim of a transphobic or homophobic online campaign. The Stuff article, for example, leads with Doyle’s dismissal of the controversy as a "baseless, personal attack" and emphasizes the "immense number of death threats and abuse" he and his child have received.
What’s Missing: The media largely glosses over the content of the posts themselves, particularly the use of the term "bussy galore" in a photo involving a child. While the term’s sexual connotations are acknowledged (e.g., in the NZ Herald article where Doyle is asked about its meaning), the implications of using such a term in this context are not thoroughly explored. The potential harm or inappropriateness of sexualizing a child through this language is sidelined in favor of a narrative that protects Doyle’s identity as a queer parent.
Contrast with George News: The George News article directly addresses the sexual undertones of "bussy" and questions whether the Green Party’s defense of it as "absurdist queer expression" is a legitimate explanation or a deflection. It argues that the media’s focus on the backlash is a deliberate attempt to shift attention away from the core issue: the potential sexualization of a minor.
Double Standards in Scrutiny:
Media Bias: The George News piece and Centrist.nz both note that a National or ACT MP would likely face far harsher scrutiny for similar behavior. The coordinated media response—Stuff, RNZ, and the NZ Herald publishing near-identical stories within the same hour—suggests a protective stance toward Doyle and the Green Party, possibly due to ideological alignment or fear of being labeled transphobic.
Public Sentiment: X users like, (@)kingsley_t34981 and (@)InARsWeTrustt echo this sentiment, arguing that Doyle’s qualifications, experience, and personal standards are not up to the level expected of an MP. They believe the media’s leniency toward Doyle is unjustified, especially given the gravity of the content in question.
Inconsistent Handling by the Green Party:
Winston Peters’ Critique: Peters highlights the Green Party’s hypocrisy in initially instructing Doyle to remove the posts due to their problematic content, but later defending them in the media. This inconsistency suggests that the Green Party is more concerned with managing the narrative than addressing the underlying issue.
Media Complicity: The media’s failure to press the Green Party on this contradiction further underscores their protective stance. Instead of questioning why the posts were deemed problematic in the first place, outlets like Stuff focus on the threats against Doyle, effectively aligning with the Green Party’s narrative of victimhood.
Minimizing the Sexualization Concern:
Doyle’s Defense: Doyle claims that "bussy" was a personal nickname with no sexual meaning in the context of his posts. However, as the George News article points out, the term has clear sexual undertones, and its use in a photo with a child raises serious questions about appropriateness.
Media’s Role: Rather than critically examining Doyle’s explanation, the media accepts it at face value. The Stuff article, for instance, quotes Doyle’s defense without challenging the plausibility of his claim, given the widely understood meaning of "bussy." This reluctance to engage with the sexualization concern contrasts sharply with the media’s willingness to amplify the threats against Doyle.
Why Benjamin Cody Doyle is Not a Victim
While it’s quite possible, that Doyle has faced threats and harassment, the narrative of victimhood does not hold up when examined against the core issue of his behavior. Here’s why:
The Content of the Posts is the Central Issue:
The "bussy galore" caption, used in a photo with a child, is deeply concerning due to the term’s sexual connotations. As X user (@)InARsWeTrustt states, "It’s not the gay bit that’s the issue. It’s the kids part." The potential sexualization of a minor in this context is a serious matter that warrants scrutiny, regardless of any threats Doyle may have received.
Doyle’s claim that the term was a personal nickname lacks credibility given its established meaning in popular culture. His admission of "political naivety" in not deleting the posts earlier further suggests that he was aware of their problematic nature but chose to leave them up until the controversy erupted.
Accountability Over Victimhood:
Winston Peters’ post emphasizes the need for responsibility and accountability, arguing that the Green Party and Doyle are using his identity as a shield to deflect criticism. The media’s focus on the threats against Doyle plays into this narrative, allowing him to avoid accountability for his actions.
The Green Party’s inconsistent stance—initially labeling the posts as problematic but later defending them—further undermines the victimhood narrative. If the posts were truly innocuous, why were they asked to be removed in the first place?
Threats Do Not Negate the Issue:
While death threats and abuse are unacceptable and should be condemned (as Prime Minister Luxon and others have done), they do not erase the legitimacy of the concerns about Doyle’s posts. The media’s emphasis on the threats creates a false dichotomy: either you support Doyle as a victim, or you’re complicit in the harassment. This framing shuts down legitimate criticism and prevents a meaningful discussion about the appropriateness of the posts.
Public and Political Expectations:
As an MP, Doyle is held to a higher standard of behavior. X users like (@)PowderPuffPlay and (@)kingsley_t34981
argue that his actions demonstrate a lack of judgment and accountability, making him unfit to represent the public. The media’s failure to hold him to this standard, instead focusing on his victimhood, undermines public trust in both the media and the political system.
Conclusion
The New Zealand media’s response to the Benjamin Cody Doyle controversy reveals a clear hypocrisy: by framing Doyle as a victim of online harassment and transphobic attacks, they have downplayed the core issue of his potentially inappropriate behavior involving the sexualization of a minor. The use of the term "bussy galore" in a photo with a child is a serious concern that warrants thorough investigation and accountability, not deflection through a narrative of victimhood.
Winston Peters’ X post rightly calls out the Green Party’s inconsistent handling of the situation and their attempt to "hide behind the rainbow community" to avoid responsibility. The George News article further exposes the media’s double standards, noting that a National or ACT MP would likely face far harsher scrutiny for similar behavior. Meanwhile, the Stuff.co.nz article exemplifies the media’s protective stance, focusing on the threats against Doyle while glossing over the implications of his posts.
Benjamin Cody Doyle is not a victim in this context. While the possible threats against him are deplorable, they do not negate the need for accountability regarding his actions.
The media’s failure to prioritize the potential harm of his posts—particularly the sexualization of a child—undermines their credibility and perpetuates a narrative that shields Doyle from legitimate criticism. The focus should be on ensuring that public figures, especially MPs, are held to a high standard of behavior, particularly when it comes to the safety and well-being of children.
NOTE: Over the coming 4 weeks, we’re going to be investigating high-profile political officials globally for crimes against children. We will be looking at the United Kingdom during April.
OBSERVATION: ‘Child Protection’ no longer seems to be a priority to the New Zealand Police. These pages no longer exist on today’s website and were last seen around 2007.
More here in our story from March 29, 2025:
NZ MEDIA SILENCE IS DEAFENING: IS LOCAL POLITICIAN, BENJAMIN CODY DOYLE A CHILD GROOMING HORROR STORY?
We love New Zealand! Ever since we visited Queenstown to chase down a story back in late 2023, we have followed it’s local political news cycle.