Editorial: Changing times remove need for ban on tweets

All Black Israel Dagg's 2014 election day tweet was referred to police. Photo / Brett Phibbs

Opinion

Election day blackout is unnecessary in an era when many people vote before the official day.

For a long time, it has been a criminal offence to publish or distribute on election day any statement that may influence how people vote. For most of that time, a fine of up to $20,000 for breaches of the law ensured it was faithfully observed. But not last year.

Twenty-six cases of tweets or social media posts made on election day were referred to the police by the Electoral Commission. The tweeters included All Blacks Israel Dagg and Jonah Lomu. Their profile has prompted a justified questioning of the value of the law.

Its intent is to provide a short spell in which people can reflect on the events of the election campaign before casting their votes.

If that once seemed relevant, it is much less so now. Many people now cast their vote before polling day, apparently untroubled by the political tumult.

Clearly, the 717,000 people who cast advance votes last year - a sizeable slice of the 2.4 million total turnout and up sharply from 270,000 in 2008 - did not feel the need for quiet reflection.

Equally, the growth of social media has added to the ammunition of those who see the black-out as a violation of free speech.

Electoral law expert Graeme Edgeler told Parliament's justice and electoral select committee this week that election-day restrictions on people using social media should be eased. So, too, he said, should those on the news media.

He is right. In the case of social media, a ban is, effectively, unenforceable. In that of the mainstream media, it no longer serves any purpose.