Temporarily deleted video from The Platform raises some questions

Controversial businessman Rhys Williams clearly outlines New Zealand First paid for the Inflection Point event in 2024 - SUPPLIED

A temporarily deleted video from The Platform raises questions about transparency and the murky intersections between party politics and private interests. In the video, controversial businessman Rhys Williams is interviewed by journalist Sean Plunket and asked about the funding behind the 2024 Inflection Point event 1720153772-all-email-attachments_redacted (2).

Williams in an interview on May 20 2024 states clearly outlines that New Zealand First paid and booked the venue, and that a third-party promotional group, SB Group, was involved in coordinating the event. However, in a separate interview, Williams distances himself from any direct affiliation with New Zealand First members or financial contributors. This contradiction raises questions about the authenticity of his claims, the degree of independence between parties and promoters. It reveals true motivations behind high-profile political events.

Adding to the controversy, investigative reporting by The Post later revealed that Williams is not simply a passive organiser or business consultant — he has extensive ties to a network of conservative-aligned media figures and donors. This includes coordination with other politically active influencers such as Brian Tamaki, and a growing online backing that has sought to amplify certain anti-trans ideological messages under the guise of “cultural” commentary.

Image: Controversial businessman Rhys Williams - SUPPLIED, Inflection Point (public Media)

thisquality’s exclusive exposé on the secret funders behind Rhys Williams directly challenges the narrative he presented at the Inflection Point event.

This revelation raises serious concerns about the hidden influence of major advertising money within Aotearoa New Zealand’s political landscape.

Groups such as the Sensible Sentencing Trust and Campaign Company — both known for their strategic media influence and close ties to conservative political narratives — illustrate how seemingly grassroots campaigns can be quietly bankrolled by powerful interests (RNZ). When these connections remain undisclosed, it becomes increasingly difficult for the public to understand genuine engagement from orchestrated political messaging.

The blurred lines between activism, marketing, and political lobbying pose a serious threat to democratic discourse throughout the nation.

Image: Green MP Benjamin Doyle speaks publicly in wake of death threats over social media posts - New Zealand Herald (livestream Apr 9, 2025)

The role of Benjamin Doyle amongst Williams' smear campaigns also deserves attention here. Williams was revealed by The Post for his involvement in online character assassination attacks against Doyle only signals a broader strategy at play.

Williams' is connected to groups engaging in issue-based campaigning and online influence echo similar trends seen internationally, where party-affiliated actors work behind the scenes to shape public debate while distancing themselves from official party structures. Doyle’s proximity to figures like Williams suggests that the Inflection Point event may not have been as independently managed or ideologically neutral.

Image: Glen Inwood (far left) - SUPPLIED, Inflection Point event

These developments raise serious questions: To what extent are political parties outsourcing messaging to third-party entities in order to obscure their role? Are voters being misled about who is truly funding and organising events designed to influence public opinion? And what mechanisms exist to ensure transparency in this increasingly blurred political-media environment?

As lines between journalism, promotion, and politics dwindle, the public is left to navigate a fragmented political sphere where accountability is often deflected and affiliations are hidden beneath layers of plausible deniability.