Questions mount over Deputy PM David Seymour’s backing of Ani O’Brien Substack smear piece targeting Maiki Sherman

Video: ACT leader David Seymour speaks to reporters during a parliamentary media stand-up on April 28, where he praised Ani O’Brien’s Substack and accused mainstream media of failing to report allegations. (Screenshot / parliamentary media stand-up / ACT Party)

Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour publicly backed fringe micro-blogger Ani O’Brien after she published allegations about political editor Maiki Sherman, despite criticism O’Brien had not sought Sherman’s response before publication.

During a media stand-up on April 28, Seymour praised O’Brien’s Substack, declaring it “Ani O’Brien Day” crediting her with publishing allegations he claimed mainstream media failed to report.

    Advertisement
  
    This ad is not available right now due to a network issue or pending review with the Google Advertisement Network. Please check back later.
  
    Advertisement
    Why this ad?
      
        Advertising revenue keeps articles from thisquality free to read. Ads are personalised by Google, not us. Thank you for your support! 🎉

Image: ACT leader David Seymour addresses reporters at Parliament on April 28, where he described Ani O’Brien as “one woman with a free Substack account” and claimed the allegations had been hidden by a year-long “conspiracy of silence”. (Screenshot / parliamentary media stand-up / ACT Party)

Seymour said it had taken “one woman with a free Substack account” to publish what he described as a story that had been subject to a “conspiracy of silence” for nearly a year.

He said if the allegations were accurate they were “absolutely disgraceful” and accused the press gallery of applying a double standard by failing to report them sooner. He also suggested Parliament’s Speaker should examine the matter, including Sherman’s parliamentary accreditation.

Sherman later resigned from her role as political editor following the controversy surrounding the allegations and the intense public scrutiny that followed.

    Advertisement
  
    This ad is not available right now due to a network issue or pending review with the Google Advertisement Network. Please check back later.
  
    Advertisement
    Why this ad?
      
        Advertising revenue keeps articles from thisquality free to read. Ads are personalised by Google, not us. Thank you for your support! 🎉

Image: Ani O’Brien is a New Zealand fringe micro-blogger publishing her writing to Substack and is known for opinion pieces, media criticism and commentary on politics, culture and public affairs. (Substack)

In public posts on X following Sherman’s resignation, O’Brien defended her smear and rejected suggestions she had orchestrated a campaign against the political editor.

“I have written hundreds of Substack articles on political matters. This is the one they seized on,” O’Brien wrote. “I wrote an article about something that happened just like I do every week.”

O’Brien said she never called for Sherman to be sacked and described the incident as an “open secret” within political and media circles. She argued New Zealand’s media culture had normalised “career-ending moral scrutiny” for public figures and said the same standards were now being turned inward.

The resignation also sparked debate across social media over media standards and the Whale Oil-era smear tactics operating outside traditional editorial processes.

Image: Former TVNZ political editor Maiki Sherman, who resigned following controversy surrounding allegations publicised online and the intense scrutiny that followed. (TVNZ)

In a public statement posted on May 8, Sherman acknowledged using “an offensive comment” toward another journalist during an after-hours function in the Finance Minister’s office the previous year.

    Advertisement
  
    This ad is not available right now due to a network issue or pending review with the Google Advertisement Network. Please check back later.
  
    Advertisement
    Why this ad?
      
        Advertising revenue keeps articles from thisquality free to read. Ads are personalised by Google, not us. Thank you for your support! 🎉

Sherman said there was “no excuse” for the language she used and confirmed she apologised the following morning to both the journalist involved and the minister. She also said the remark came in response to “deeply personal and inappropriate remarks” directed at her earlier that evening.

Seymour’s endorsement drew criticism as the allegations were published without an apparent right of reply for Sherman, a basic expectation in standard journalistic practice.

By elevating the Substack and attacking mainstream reporters, Seymour is accused of backing a one-sided smear campaign against Sherman while condemning others over media standards. His remarks followed criticism suggesting he had given credibility to a partisan attack piece and helped legitimise a biased publication that did not give its main subject a right of reply.

4 Comments

Most Voted

Newest Oldest

Aroha

9 days ago

Seymour’s backing of this smear piece is a pretty dodgy move. He’s essentially saying it’s okay to publish unsubstantiated claims without giving the person a right of reply, just ‘cos it’s not from a ‘mainstream’ source. That’s a pretty weak defence of journalistic standards.

Nelson Local

1 month ago

It appears Deputy PM David Seymour has made a grave mistake in backing Ani smear piece targeting Maiki without first verifying the claims or giving Sherman a fair right of reply. I’m still puzzled as to why Seymour felt the need to go down this path??? What drove his desire to elevate O’Brien, given her questionable journalistic practices? The credibility of a government MP using his platform to promote a biased publication makes me wonder.. . we are told O’Brien has written hundreds of articles but this one got picked up, almost as if Seymour is using his influence to stir the pot.

Ivy K.

I get where Seymour coming from with his support of allegations against Maiki Sherman, I reckon it’s fair to say he’s made a bit of a rod for his own back here.

QuietTake_14

It is disappointing thatDavid failed to consider the standard journalistic practices he’s now criticising others for not following.

Advertisement

Advertisement Why this ad? Advertising revenue keeps articles from thisquality free to read. Ads are personalised by Google, not us. Thank you for your support! 🎉