TikTok Australia-New Zealand global business solutions general manager Amy Bradshaw and Infometrics chief executive Brad Olsen, who announced on Friday that he was stepping back from that role. Photo montage / NZME

Media Insider analysis: TikTok’s strategy comes as new PHD research delves into the professional relationships between journalists and public relations professionals.

A media story emerged this week that illustrated, perfectly, the importance of digging deeper.

TikTok went on a public relations offensive in New Zealand, releasing an Infometrics report, claimingthat the Chinese-owned social media giant contributes $1.2 billion and almost 10,000 jobs to the New Zealand economy.

That study was duly picked up by most media outlets.

Stuff’s Damien Venuto and the Herald’s Katie Bradford, hosting the Ryan Bridge Today show, did a superb job of delving beyond the PR headlines to ask the obvious: really?

They firstly pointed out an important fact: TikTok commissioned the research.

That doesn’t mean it’s wrong. Businesses commission economic impact studies all the time, but they also tend to commission studies that measure the benefits they create, not the costs.

So the $1.2b might well be one side of the ledger; it takes into account business growth and creator income – although even that was contested.

Simplicity chief economist Shamubeel Eaqub told RNZ that the report needed to be taken “with a sack of salt”. It assumed that the activity would not have happened elsewhere if TikTok was not present in New Zealand.

“I think it’s that essentially the story is, is it net new additional spend?” Eaqub said. “And the answer is no.”

And then there are the broader economics.

As a foreign-owned technology giant, a significant amount of the value that TikTok creates ultimately flows offshore.

As Eaqub pointed out, the report had not tackled the tax questions around multinationals making money in this country.

On her show, Bradford asked TikTok Australia-New Zealand global business solutions general manager Amy Bradshaw about the amount of tax TikTok paid in New Zealand.

Bradford: “Amy, great to see that TikTok’s contributing to the NZ economy. How much tax does TikTok pay in New Zealand?”

Bradshaw: “I don’t have those numbers specifically, but what I can say is we are a global company, and we’re structured like many other global companies.” She then tried to turn the interview back to the report.

Bradford: “Do you know if you pay your fair share of tax in New Zealand?”

Bradshaw: “I don’t have those numbers, I’m not the tax ... my role at TikTok is to work with the local businesses, really to help them onboard onto the platform ...”

Bradford later ended the interview with a plea to Bradshaw: “I’d love to get those numbers on tax if your team want to get them to us?”

“Yep,” said Bradshaw, in a not-too-convincing response.

I followed up with TikTok’s PR person Kelly Stevens four times on the question of tax. She did not respond to those specific requests.

While TikTok has a presence on the New Zealand companies register, it is listed as Singapore-registered ByteDance Pte.

That company, ultimately owned by a Cayman Islands parent, files only global accounts for the social media giant that do not break down revenues earned from – or tax paid to – New Zealand.

The timing of the Infometrics report release was also interesting. As I noted on the Herald NOW Business show earlier this week, it lands just as the political debate heats up about whether under-16s should be banned from social media platforms, including TikTok.

Many parents, educators and health experts are worried about the impact of excessive social media use on young people, including their concentration, mental health, sleep and wellbeing.

But this report wasn’t commissioned to put a dollar figure on anxiety, cyberbullying and lost productivity.

TikTok’s Parliament party

After a round of media interviews on Tuesday, TikTok hosted a party at Parliament’s legislative chamber on Wednesday evening, in a further showcase of its PR tactics.

There, Act leader David Seymour, who is opposed to the Government’s proposed social media ban for under-16s, spoke about the changing face and shape of media.

Infometrics’ Brad Olsen outlined the key findings of his company’s report.

Olsen today announced he was stepping back from his role as Infometrics chief executive to focus his energies on his principal economist role.

“I’m wanting to better focus my time on ensuring as many people as possible – Infometrics clients, decision makers and the public at large – are better informed and that economics is put simply,” Olsen said in a press statement.

Infometrics Gareth Kiernan would be the acting managing director, the company said.

The Herald’sAudrey Young reported in her Inside Politics newsletter yesterday: “The TikTok app may be banned from parliamentary devices on security grounds, but that didn’t stop the company from hosting an event at Parliament to highlight a report on its contribution to the NZ economy. Attendees were entertained with a performance by The Music of Charles, which could be heard several floors away...”

A range of MPs from various parties were at the event, including Labour media spokesman Reuben Davidson, who is playing a pivotal role as the party considers whether to support National’s social media ban.

“I meet with social media platforms and media platforms when they visit Wellington,” Davidson told Media Insider.

“It was interesting to see TikTok’s economic impact report released and I look forward to reading it. The event provided a forum to hear from local content creators and directly from Brad Olsen, who prepared the report.”

While TikTok’s Kelly Stevens has ignored multiple requests for a response on the company’s tax position, she did provide a statement about the Parliament event: “The event was held to mark the official launch of our inaugural Economic Impact Report. It was attended by New Zealand creators, small and large businesses, MPs, NZ Herald journalists, parliamentary staff and report author Infometrics.”

Stevens’ specific citing of Herald journalists seemed slightly odd, especially given other journalists were there.

I went back to her to ask her about that, and the cost of the event. She didn’t respond on either.

Journalists-PR professionals dynamic

The TikTok moves this week are a good segue to a broader piece of research.

There’s a well-known journalism quote, sometimes attributed (wrongly) to George Orwell: “Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed; everything else is public relations.”

Now, a fascinating new study has delved into the relationship between journalists and public relations professionals in New Zealand, including how journos perceive those working in PR.

Similar to the quote above, there’s a trope that journalists consider the public relations industry “the dark side”: elusive characters hiding the truth.

And sure, in my former editorial roles and since being back on the frontline in the past three years, I’ve encountered a small proportion of PR people who are either elusive (some don’t even bother acknowledging a request for comment – astounding, especially for media firms) or they outright mislead.

By the same token, many PR people will have their own beefs about journos.

But by and large, through my own experiences and observing other newsroom interactions, the relationship is pretty good. If you know the motive of a PR person, and treat any information as a starting point for further inquiry, it can be an important and useful relationship.

The new Auckland University of Technology PhD thesis by communications academic Daljit Singh Bedi delves deep into the relationship.

After analysing 103 stories from the NZ Herald, Stuff and the Otago Daily Times between 2011 and 2023 and interviewing 21 senior journalists, Bedi found some nuanced patterns in the relationships.

“The interviews showed journalists rarely divide communications people into ‘good’ and ‘bad’,” Singh wrote on The Conversation website this week. “Instead, they constantly assess why someone is behaving the way they are.

“Is a media adviser or PR professional genuinely trying to help explain a complicated issue? Are they constrained by legal or organisational rules? Or are they deliberately trying to influence or limit coverage?”

He said journalists spoke positively about PR practitioners who “understood newsroom pressures, responded quickly, provided accurate information and facilitated access to decision-makers or technical experts”.

“Over time, those repeated interactions helped build professional reputations. Those who consistently provide reliable information become trusted contacts, while others become known for claims that reporters are less willing to accept at face value.

“Even then, trust has limits. Journalists stressed that credibility never replaces verification. A trusted source might make reporting more efficient, but reporters still regarded independent checking as central to their role.”

Another fascinating aspect of Bedi’s research was the way some stories were framed.

A common headline or reference was “PR disaster”. Bedi cited coverage of a backlash over expensive All Blacks Adidas jerseys, labelled a “public relations disaster”; and, internationally, an infamous incident in which a United Airlines passenger was dragged off a plane as a “public relations fiasco”.

“The term ‘PR disaster’ appeared 15 times across 13 stories, while others, such as ‘PR stunt’, ‘PR war’, ‘PR tricks’ and ‘PR ploy’, appeared more than four times each,” Bedi said in his study.

“These phrases bring additional meanings, both positive and negative. Often, they create a negative image by depicting public relations as dishonest or superficial rather than emphasising it as a valid communication strategy.”

One quote from a journalist interviewed for the thesis captured a particular mindset: “Public relations is centred on enhancing image, whereas journalists are committed to uncovering the truth.”

In his Conversationpiece, Bedi said his research suggested the reality was more sophisticated than the popular image of journalists and public relations practitioners locked in “constant conflict”.

“For now, at least, New Zealand journalists appear to retain the capacity to make careful professional judgments about credibility, motive and public interest.

“In an era of media layoffs, online misinformation and declining trust in institutions, preserving that capacity may prove just as important as preserving the newsrooms themselves.”

Editor-at-Large Shayne Currie is one of New Zealand’s most experienced senior journalists and media leaders. He has held executive and senior editorial roles at NZME, including Managing Editor, NZ Herald Editor and Herald on Sunday Editor, and has a small shareholding in NZME.