object(WP_Post)#8035 (24) { ["ID"]=> int(2172) ["post_author"]=> string(2) "36" ["post_date"]=> string(19) "2019-06-25 01:36:25" ["post_date_gmt"]=> string(19) "2019-06-25 01:36:25" ["post_content"]=> string(6573) "

The immediate challenge is not killer robots, its job replacement. If individuals are automated out of jobs, the future for society is bleak.

Computers can already take orders, fold clothes and even drive cars, but where to from here?

The robots are coming. Although often spoken of in future tense, the truth is machine learning is well and truly here. Without realising, consumers interact with ‘smart’ technology at almost every touch point; from robotic vacuums to facial recognition technology, artificial intelligence (AI) is helping to complete tasks faster, cheaper and – sometimes - more effectively than ever before.

In an economy that’s driven by speed and efficiency, it should come as no surprise that a computer’s ability to communicate at a trillion bits per second is favoured above the human capability of about 10 bits.

McKinsey recently reported that 40 per cent of work tasks can be automated using existing technology, prompting everyone from factory workers to lawyers and accountants to consider the threat of being replaced by robots as not just inevitable, but imminent.

For technologists, we are witnessing first-hand how this emerging field is transforming the companies we work for.

In my work at Isentia, we use machine learning to process seven million news items each day. Not long ago this was a task relegated performed solely by humans with the mind-numbing task of flipping through newspapers in search of stories that might relate to a client.

We have a duty to empower those around us to learn everything they can about what their job may evolve into in order to become the very best man-machine partner possible.

Today, machines trawl video, audio and digital content across over 5,500 new sites at a rate of 234 stories per second and present meaningful summaries to clients in real-time.

Whether a story breaks on Twitter and then spills across news platforms and onto television and radio, machine learning can track and analyse how a story evolves with 99 per cent accuracy.

While AI is revolutionising the way that we work, the impact is far greater for those in the tech industry. In our mission to develop software that can learn complex problems without needing to be taught how, the success of the AI industry ultimately comes down to technology professionals: our ability to automate, and the pace at which we expand the field of machine learning.

With an annual growth rate of 19.7 per cent percent (predicted to be worth $15.3 billion by 2019), it’s safe to say our foot is well and truly on the pedal. While this relies greatly on our technical capabilities, it is something that challenges many of us ethically: what set of values should AI be aligned with?

Two of the greatest technologists of our times, Elon Musk and Stephen Hawking, have spoken about both the potential benefit and the harm that an AI arms race could deliver. An eradication of disease is not unfathomable, but nor is a threat to humanity. They hold grave concerns as to whether or not robots can be controlled against misuse or malfunction.

While thought provoking, the immediate challenge is not killer robots, it’s job replacement. Employment may not seem like an ethical problem, but if individuals are automated out of jobs, the future for society is bleak. While the phrase ‘Thank God it’s Friday’ has forged its way into the 9-to-5 vernacular, for most people, jobs create a huge sense of personal and professional satisfaction… not to mention a means to pay bills.

An apocalypse might be somewhat melodramatic, however I do agree that it is important to consider just how closely we should merge biological and digital intelligence.

Computers can already take orders, fold clothes and even drive cars, but where to from here? It’s both exciting and terrifying. The last time we experienced a revolution like this was in the early 1900s when cars, telephones and the airplane all emerged at once.

Contrary to the hype, there lies an enormous opportunity for humans to work with artificial intelligence, not be replaced by it.

Make no mistake: at some level every job can be carried out by a robot. But there are certain jobs, particularly in technology, that require decision making, planning or coding software.

While computers do a brilliant job of executing well-defined activities - such as telling us the fastest route to get from home to work - it is safe to say that humans are an essential component of goal setting, interpreting results, humour, sarcasm and implementing common sense checks.

The most difficult jobs to automate are those that involve managing and developing people. While in this industry most of our jobs are safe (for now), we should heed the advice of Musk and Hawkings and protect those outside our field by proceeding with caution. How then to facilitate human and robots working together harmoniously without the workforce morphing into cyborgs? The secret is to not sail out farther we can row back.

As technologists, we also have a duty to empower those around us to learn everything they can about what their job may evolve into in order to become the very best man-machine partner possible. It's the best, and most ethical, way to prepare for the inevitable advent of AI.

First publish in CIO New Zealand

Andrea Walsh, CIO

" ["post_title"]=> string(39) "It's time to slow down the AI arms race" ["post_excerpt"]=> string(92) "Computers can already take orders, fold clothes and even drive cars, but where to from here?" ["post_status"]=> string(7) "publish" ["comment_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["ping_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["post_password"]=> string(0) "" ["post_name"]=> string(38) "its-time-to-slow-down-the-ai-arms-race" ["to_ping"]=> string(0) "" ["pinged"]=> string(0) "" ["post_modified"]=> string(19) "2019-06-26 01:01:55" ["post_modified_gmt"]=> string(19) "2019-06-26 01:01:55" ["post_content_filtered"]=> string(0) "" ["post_parent"]=> int(0) ["guid"]=> string(43) "https://isentiastaging.wpengine.com/?p=1829" ["menu_order"]=> int(0) ["post_type"]=> string(4) "post" ["post_mime_type"]=> string(0) "" ["comment_count"]=> string(1) "0" ["filter"]=> string(3) "raw" }

object(WP_Post)#7806 (24) { ["ID"]=> int(50464) ["post_author"]=> string(2) "75" ["post_date"]=> string(19) "2026-10-19 01:20:16" ["post_date_gmt"]=> string(19) "2026-10-19 01:20:16" ["post_content"]=> string(32656) "

A weekly tracker tracing the stories, figures and policies driving media and social coverage in the 2026 New Zealand General Election across Online News, TV, Radio, Newspaper, Magazine, X, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Threads and Forums. This edition covers conversations and coverage from 8th - 15th October, highlighting what’s shaping the election conversation.

1. Election Conversation

Media = news coverage. Social = all public posts across X, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Threads and Forums - everyone posting, not just media outlets.

2. Media Issue of the Week

Green and Te Pāti Māori MPs Draw Criticism Over Meeting With Mongrel Mob Members

Candidates and sitting MPs from the Green Party and Te Pāti Māori attended a meeting with Mongrel Mob members at a gang address. When photographs from the meeting were shared on social media, the response from commentators and rival parties was swift and largely critical.

This was not the week's highest-volume story, accounting for only 112 of 4,479 media items (2.5%, after filtering out unrelated international content) and 116 of 13,938 unique social posts (0.8%, after collapsing retweet/repost duplicates down to one count per message), well below the volume generated by ongoing leaders' debate coverage, which totalled 1,125 media items. Two independent methods nonetheless support treating it as a genuine, separable story: an exact keyword count aligns closely with an unsupervised clustering analysis of the entire media population, which identified it as a distinct 47-item cluster - smaller than general campaign coverage and several specific policy announcements, but clearly distinguishable from them. What sets the story apart is the intensity of the reaction rather than its scale: 72% of social commentary on the topic was negative, the most one-sided sentiment recorded for any subject this week, and the average post attracted roughly 5.7 times the typical level of engagement. Taken together, these figures point to a genuine public reaction concentrated on social platforms, and the episode provides National and ACT with a law-and-order narrative that may continue into coming weeks. It has not been linked to a tracked party policy below, as it reflects a matter of conduct rather than a policy position.

3. What's happening across media and social?

4,479 media items · 13,938 social items · share of each channel's own conversation, so the two bars are directly comparable

"Social" is all public posts across X, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Threads and Forums - not just media organisations' own accounts.

The most active commentary this week came from Sean Plunket, the Chris Chang and Tova O'Brien pairing, and John MacDonald.

By follower reach, the most prominent social accounts posting about the election this week were major outlets' own accounts - the New Zealand Herald, 1News, RNZ, Stuff and Radio Tarana - alongside the official Labour Party account. Individual leaders' personal accounts posted actively but with smaller followings than these outlet and party accounts.

The Greens continue to receive disproportionately greater attention on social media relative to traditional news coverage, accounting for 20.4% of social party conversation compared with 14.1% in media coverage - roughly 1.4 times the media share.

Law and order shows a similarly pronounced gap between channels this week, accounting for 10.6% of social conversation compared with 5.3% in the news. This is consistent with the public reaction to the Mongrel Mob meeting, which appears to have generated considerably sharper engagement on social platforms than mainstream coverage volume alone would suggest.

4. Party Share of Conversation

Shown for the four largest parliamentary parties (National, Labour, Greens, NZ First); ACT, Te Pāti Māori and TOP are tracked elsewhere in this report but not included in this chart, so these shares sum to 100% of the four shown, not of all tracked parties. Share of conversation measures attention and mentions only - it is not polling and should not be read as an indication of electoral success.

5. Top candidates this week

Winston Peters leads the rankings this week, a shift driven primarily by a widely circulated moment in the minor-party leaders' debate in which he described diversity as "a weakness rather than a strength" while delivering a pointed critique of the left-leaning bloc. Christopher Luxon and Chris Hipkins follow closely behind as the campaign moves into its final weeks, while David Seymour and Chloe Swarbrick complete the top five, each drawing attention largely through their parties' own policy announcements this week.

6. Election Issues

Top 4 themes this week

What's driving conversation about each party?

Each major party's top-ranked issues this week, by real topic volume in their social conversation (after excluding other parties' names, individual people, and procedural or horse-race chatter), with how that conversation leaned

Volume and sentiment above are based on social media data only.

7. Issues to Watch

• The meeting between Green and Te Pāti Māori representatives and Mongrel Mob members represents a reputational risk for both parties heading into the final weeks of the campaign. Whether National and ACT are able to sustain this as a law-and-order narrative through to the 7 November election is worth monitoring closely.
• Labour's fiscal plan issue recorded the most negative social sentiment of any tracked policy this week, at 55.3% negative, followed by Greens' wealth tax at 53.7% and ACT's fiscal plan at 50.0%. All three touch on tax, spending or fiscal policy specifically, suggesting the fiscal debate is where social sentiment is running most negative across the board this week, rather than any one party facing an isolated problem.
• Social media discussion of the Greens continues to centre on polling performance and tactical voting considerations rather than policy substance. Coalition and tactical-voting framing accounts for 12.7% of their social conversation this week, compared with just 2.2% focused specifically on their wealth tax proposal - a pattern that has now held for three consecutive weeks. Whether that balance shifts as the campaign enters its final stretch would be worth tracking.

---

If you want to find out more about how Isentia can help you understand the NZ media landscape, please reach out to us here.

" ["post_title"]=> string(83) "NZ Election 2026: Mongrel Mob Controversy, Fiscal Policy and Greens on social media" ["post_excerpt"]=> string(156) "Explore New Zealand’s 2026 election conversation, from the Mongrel Mob meeting controversy and law and order to reactions to Labour’s capital gains tax." ["post_status"]=> string(7) "publish" ["comment_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["ping_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["post_password"]=> string(0) "" ["post_name"]=> string(49) "nz-election-2026-mongrel-mob-fiscal-policy-greens" ["to_ping"]=> string(0) "" ["pinged"]=> string(0) "" ["post_modified"]=> string(19) "2026-10-19 01:20:22" ["post_modified_gmt"]=> string(19) "2026-10-19 01:20:22" ["post_content_filtered"]=> string(0) "" ["post_parent"]=> int(0) ["guid"]=> string(32) "https://www.isentia.com/?p=50464" ["menu_order"]=> int(0) ["post_type"]=> string(4) "post" ["post_mime_type"]=> string(0) "" ["comment_count"]=> string(1) "0" ["filter"]=> string(3) "raw" }

object(WP_Post)#12121 (24) { ["ID"]=> int(50341) ["post_author"]=> string(2) "75" ["post_date"]=> string(19) "2026-10-08 11:53:50" ["post_date_gmt"]=> string(19) "2026-10-08 11:53:50" ["post_content"]=> string(26341) "

A weekly tracker tracing the stories, figures and policies driving media and social coverage in the 2026 New Zealand General Election across Online News, TV, Radio, Newspaper, Magazine, X, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Threads and Forums. This edition covers conversations and coverage from 1st – 8th October, highlighting what’s shaping the election conversation.

1. Election Conversation

2. Media Issue of the Week

National Proposes Drug Testing and Benefit Cuts for Jobseekers

National announced a five-point welfare policy: random drug testing for JobSeeker recipients (with sanctions for repeat failures), reduced payments for long-term beneficiaries, and a doubled stand-down period for repeatedly leaving jobs without good reason. Labour and the Greens called it "punching down" and "cruel"; ACT proposed going even further; Luxon defended it as "fairness" for taxpayers.

The single largest media cluster this week (183 of 600 sampled items) was generic "campaigning intensifies as election day nears" coverage. This welfare policy, while smaller by volume (29 items), is a genuine flashpoint: a specific, controversial announcement that sharply divided every major party and will likely keep generating reaction into next week.

3. What's happening across media and social?

4,360 media items · 17,277 social items · share of each channel's own conversation, so the two bars are directly comparable

The Greens get more than twice the relative attention on social media as in the news. On social, the Greens are 20.8% of party conversation; in the news, they're 10.3%.

Health is a top-four issue on social but not in the news this week - Infrastructure takes its place in media's top four instead. Social conversation is tilting toward the health system while media coverage stays on economy, cost of living and infrastructure announcements.

4. Party Share of Conversation

Share of conversation measures attention and mentions only - it is not polling and should not be read as an indication of electoral success.

5. Top candidates this week

Luxon and Hipkins remain close at the top as the campaign enters its final stretch. Peters follows, still driven by coalition speculation. Seymour moves up to fourth on the back of ACT's economic-reform push (including floating a higher superannuation age), overtaking Swarbrick, whose fifth-place mentions continue to track the Greens' polling strength.

6. Election Issues

Top 4 themes this week

How are policies landing for each party?

Each major party's most prominent specific policy, and how social conversation reacted to it

Volume and sentiment above are based on social media data only.

7. Issues to Watch

• National's welfare drug-testing policy is a fresh, sharply divisive flashpoint - the "punching down" framing from Labour and the Greens, and ACT signalling it wants to go further still, both point to more reaction next week.
• Labour's capital gains tax remains the week's clearest negative outlier (85.5% negative on social). National's own infrastructure pledge is also net-negative this week (42.3% vs 21.2% positive), despite infrastructure announcements usually landing on safer ground than tax policy. ACT's KiwiSaver policy, by contrast, remains clearly positive (91.3%).
• On social, discussion of the Greens is mostly about polling results and tactical voting rather than their own policy: 14% of their social conversation is coalition/tactical-voting framing (which bloc to "party vote" for), versus just 2% specifically about their wealth tax policy - their polling surge is driving attention more than their platform is.

---

If you want to find out more about how Isentia can help you understand the NZ media landscape, please reach out to us here.

" ["post_title"]=> string(71) "NZ Election 2026: Welfare, Greens and the policies driving conversation" ["post_excerpt"]=> string(152) "What’s shaping New Zealand’s 2026 election conversation? Explore the key policies, parties and issues driving media and social discussion this week." ["post_status"]=> string(7) "publish" ["comment_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["ping_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["post_password"]=> string(0) "" ["post_name"]=> string(69) "nz-election-2026-welfare-greens-and-the-policies-driving-conversation" ["to_ping"]=> string(0) "" ["pinged"]=> string(0) "" ["post_modified"]=> string(19) "2026-10-19 07:37:01" ["post_modified_gmt"]=> string(19) "2026-10-19 07:37:01" ["post_content_filtered"]=> string(0) "" ["post_parent"]=> int(0) ["guid"]=> string(32) "https://www.isentia.com/?p=50341" ["menu_order"]=> int(0) ["post_type"]=> string(4) "post" ["post_mime_type"]=> string(0) "" ["comment_count"]=> string(1) "0" ["filter"]=> string(3) "raw" }