When the Whale Oil playbook stopped working

Video: A short exposé video article by Samuel Hudson summarising how blogger Cameron Slater’s latest “Good Oil” coverage of an internal Manukau Urban Māori Authority employment dispute was framed as a major scandal but largely fizzled. (Supplied / thisquality / Quiet Pact Network)

Blogger Cameron Slater built a public persona on provocation and spectacle, confident that if he generated enough noise then accusation could be mistaken for truth. For years, that approach thrived in the loud, fast-moving arena of online politics. The problem was that the noise did not stay there and eventually, it entered courtrooms, where evidence was examined slowly and outcomes were measured in real consequences.

Those consequences accumulated into a financial record of accountability arising directly from the Whale Oil era, exposing Slater to the highest scrutiny under New Zealand’s legal framework and accelerating the decline of the influence that platform once commanded.

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: Whale Oil was a highly influential and controversial New Zealand political blog run by blogger Cameron Slater from 2005 until it shut down in 2019. It began as a personal outlet but became known for its right-wing commentary, aggressive political posts and for publishing material linked to smear campaigns and attacks. (Supplied / thisquality / whaleoil.co.nz)

In the long-running defamation case brought by Matthew Blomfield, the High Court ordered Slater and his company to pay $475,000 in damages after finding his publications were false, defamatory and malicious. The judgment recorded, in precise legal language, that the campaign was designed to destroy a man’s reputation and noted years of obstruction, delay and conduct intended to frustrate the legal process.

Separately, the Human Rights Review Tribunal found that Slater had interfered with privacy through the harmful disclosure of personal information, awarding $70,000 in damages for humiliation, loss of dignity and injury to feelings, alongside formal orders restricting further misuse of that material.

The pattern continued in Craig v Slater, where ten defamatory publications resulted in $325,000 in general and aggravated damages, plus a further $95,000 in costs. The Court emphasised the serious reputational harm, the deliberate nature of the campaign and Slater’s refusal to retract.

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! 🎉

The total matters because it shows that what was presented during the Whale Oil years as political theatre has repeatedly been judged as harmful conduct with real victims. These findings are fixed in detailed judicial records and followed by real financial accountability. Bankruptcy may complicate collection, but it does not erase the judgments.

Image: Cameron Slater sits down with Matt McCarten in a podcast episode. Screenshot from 'The Good Oil Podcast - Episode 22 - Matt McCarten' (YouTube / The Good Oil Podcast)

The legal record remains and it now shadows every new campaign Slater attempts to ignite.

Read full video transcript

While care has been taken with accuracy, minor transcription errors may be present
Email editor@thisquality.com for corrections

Samuel Hudson
[ 00:05:11,780 ] If this all sounds familiar, it should. Whale Oil was not an accident of the internet. It was rather a political weapon. It sat inside an influence network that traded on leaks, reputational destruction, and coordinated pressure. That is why 2014 mattered. It revealed the mechanics and the relationships that fed them. The public saw behind the curtain and Slater’s influence never recovered.

Samuel Hudson
[ 00:05:40,480 ] But Slater never stopped trying. He simply moved platforms and rebranded. But the mechanics have always stayed the same.

Samuel Hudson
[ 00:05:50,490 ] And this is where the record becomes definitive. In the Blomfield litigation, the High Court ultimately found Slater’s Whale Oil publication defamatory and malicious and awarded major damages. That dispute also produced a Human Rights Review Tribunal decision finding an interference with privacy, with damages and restraints imposed. Further, in the Craig proceedings, Slater was found liable for defamation and the damages were later assessed at a substantial figure, reflecting the scale of harm tied to what he published. These are repeated legal findings that Slater’s work lines. They confirm a pattern, escalate, attack, publish, then hide behind the language of commentary when the damage is done.

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! 🎉

*This transcript contains the spoken dialogue from the video included in this article. Any views expressed by third parties are their own and are not those of the host or the publisher

Support Brief Banner

Keep independent journalism going.

We are independent and committed to bringing authentic reporting to the people.

thisquality is built for the people and powered by their support. People like you reading this free article help us remain a strong and independent platform within New Zealand's media landscape.

I'd like to donate

About thisquality

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! 🎉