Newsletter

“Exposing Audrey Young's Racist Assault on Palestinian Solidarity” - 15 August 2025

When Colonial Mouthpieces Attack Truth-Tellers

Ivor Jones The Māori Green Ltn

15 Aug 2025 — 15 min read

Kia ora koutou, I am Ivor Jones, Te Māori Green Lantern, kaitiaki of truth in a sea of colonial propaganda.

Today I bring you fire and fury, for when our people's solidarity with Palestine is under attack, silence becomes complicity, and my job is to burn down the lies that prop up this rotting system.

The establishment scribes are panicking. When Chlöe Swarbrick stood in Parliament demanding New Zealand apply the same sanctions to Israel that we applied to Russia - basic consistency for war crimes - Audrey Young's response was to viciously attack the messenger while ignoring the genocide unfolding before our eyes. This is colonial journalism at its most putrid - defending power while Indigenous voices demand justice.

Background: The Colonial Media Machine

To understand Young's attack, we must first understand her role as a gatekeeper for settler colonial power. The New Zealand Herald's long history of bias against Palestinian liberation reflects broader patterns of how colonial media frames Indigenous resistance movements as threats to the established order. Young, awarded "Political Journalist of the Year" multiple times, represents the pinnacle of this system - rewarded precisely because she serves power rather than challenges it.

New Zealand media outlets positioned by perceived political bias and journalistic quality on a spectrum from far-left to far-right reddit

The media landscape Young operates within systematically marginalises Māori and Indigenous voices. Studies show Māori journalism has "fallen between the cracks" while colonial perspectives dominate mainstream discourse. This creates the perfect environment for Young's brand of reactionary journalism - where challenging settler colonialism becomes "divisive" and demanding justice becomes "making it all about herself."

Young's career trajectory reveals someone deeply embedded in the parliamentary press gallery establishment. Her own admission of crying when she first started at the Herald because she was leaving "The Auckland Sun" shows her allegiance has always been to institutional power rather than challenging it. She has become the system's perfect attack dog - vicious to those who threaten the status quo, fawning to those who maintain it.

The Anatomy of a Hit Job

Young's piece masquerades as political analysis but functions as a character assassination designed to discredit Palestinian solidarity. Her central thesis - that Swarbrick made the Palestine debate "all about her" - employs classic colonial rhetoric used to silence Indigenous voices throughout history. When Māori leaders speak truth to power, they are accused of being "divisive." When they demand justice, they are painted as "self-centred."

The actual events were straightforward: during a debate on Palestinian statehood, Swarbrick challenged government MPs to "grow a spine" and support sanctions against Israel. Speaker Gerry Brownlee demanded she apologise. She refused and was ejected for the week. The next day, she again refused to apologise, was named by the Speaker, and left.

Young's "analysis" ignores the substantive issue - Israel's genocide in Gaza that has killed over 40,000 Palestinians - and instead focuses obsessively on Swarbrick's demeanour and tactics. This is deliberate misdirection, shifting attention from Israeli war crimes to parliamentary procedure. Classic colonial journalism: when Indigenous people demand justice, make it about their tone, not the injustice they're highlighting.

The timing is crucial. Christopher Luxon had just called Netanyahu "lost the plot" - strong language from a conservative Prime Minister. Israel's Deputy Foreign Minister fired back with racist stereotypes about New Zealand, claiming our "most deadly enemy is a possum." Young's response? Attack the Green MP demanding sanctions, not the Israeli official making racist slurs about our country.

Deconstructing Colonial Propaganda Tactics

The Respectability Politics Trap

Young's criticism relies heavily on respectability politics - the colonial demand that Indigenous people and their allies protest "nicely" to be taken seriously. She praises Luxon's "statesmanlike" approach while condemning Swarbrick's "self-centred" tactics. This false binary - reasonable settler vs dramatic Indigenous woman - runs through centuries of colonial discourse.

Research on Indigenous resistance shows how settler colonial systems consistently delegitimise direct action while praising empty rhetoric. Young's piece perfectly demonstrates this pattern. She celebrates Luxon's meaningless words while attacking Swarbrick's concrete demands for sanctions. The message is clear: settlers can criticise Israel with impunity, but Indigenous voices demanding action cross the line.

The gendered dimension cannot be ignored. Young's characterisation of Swarbrick as "self-centred" deploys classic misogynistic tropes used to silence women in politics. When men speak passionately, they show "leadership." When women do the same, they're "emotional" or "making it about themselves." Young, as a woman in journalism, should recognise these patterns but instead weaponises them against a younger woman challenging power.

The Manaakitanga vs Colonial Courtesy False Choice

Young implicitly contrasts Māori values with parliamentary decorum, suggesting Swarbrick violated some universal standard of respectful debate. This ignores how parliamentary procedure itself is a colonial imposition designed to constrain Indigenous political expression. Traditional Māori decision-making processes emphasise consensus and genuine dialogue, not the theatrical point-scoring Young celebrates.

True manaakitanga would centre the suffering of Palestinian whānau, not the bruised egos of government MPs who refuse to act. Young's focus on parliamentary "courtesy" while children starve in Gaza represents the worst of colonial priorities - tone policing while genocide unfolds. This violates every principle of tika, of standing with the oppressed against their oppressors.

The māori concept of tino rangatiratanga - absolute chieftainship - demands we challenge systems of oppression wherever they exist. Swarbrick's reference to standing "on the right side of history" embodies this principle. Young's attack on this stance reveals her fundamental opposition to Indigenous self-determination, whether in Palestine or Aotearoa.

The Hidden Network: Media as Colonial Enforcement Mechanism

Recommendations from disadvantaged communities to media outlets for reducing bias and building trust in news coverage, from the Reuters Institute report reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac

Young's position within the parliamentary press gallery represents a crucial node in the colonial information system. Her access to politicians and sources depends on maintaining relationships with power holders. This creates powerful incentives to attack those who threaten the system rather than challenge the system itself.

The press gallery's structure mirrors broader colonial hierarchies. Māori media initiatives struggle for funding while establishment journalists like Young receive prestigious awards for serving colonial interests. This isn't accidental - it's systematic marginalisation designed to amplify settler voices while silencing Indigenous perspectives.

Young's attack piece serves multiple colonial functions simultaneously. It delegitimises Palestinian solidarity, reinforces parliamentary procedure as sacred, and portrays Indigenous-led resistance as dangerous extremism. Her celebration of Luxon's meaningless rhetoric while attacking Swarbrick's concrete demands reveals the colonial preference for performative over substantive change.

The International Context: Solidarity Under Attack

Young's piece cannot be separated from the global assault on Palestinian solidarity. The BDS movement faces systematic suppression precisely because it threatens colonial projects worldwide. Young's attack on Swarbrick follows this pattern - weaponising procedural concerns to undermine substantive solidarity.

The Israeli response to Luxon's criticism - racist mockery about "possums and cats" - reveals the colonial mindset that sees Indigenous peoples as lesser threats. Young's silence about this racism while attacking Swarbrick for demanding action speaks volumes about whose dignity she values.

International law scholars increasingly identify Israel's actions as genocide, yet Young treats this as a matter of political opinion rather than legal fact. This relativism - treating genocide as "one side of the debate" - represents journalism's complete moral bankruptcy. When the powerful commit atrocities, colonial media transforms legal questions into political disputes.

The Co-governance Connection: Domestic and International Colonialism

Young's attack on Swarbrick connects to broader resistance against Māori self-determination. Her previous coverage of co-governance debates consistently frames Indigenous rights as threats to democracy rather than expressions of it. The same colonial logic that opposes Palestinian statehood opposes Māori rangatiratanga.

Research on co-governance shows how colonial fears of "division" mask deeper anxieties about sharing power with Indigenous peoples. Young's characterisation of Swarbrick as "divisive" employs identical rhetoric used against Māori advancement. The message is consistent: Indigenous voices demanding justice threaten social cohesion.

The global nature of settler colonialism means Palestinian liberation and Māori liberation are intimately connected. Young's inability to see these connections reflects her position within colonial structures that benefit from maintaining artificial separations between Indigenous struggles.

The Stakes of Colonial Journalism

Young's attack represents more than personal animus - it's systematic suppression of Indigenous-led movements for global justice. When Māori voices demand concrete action on Palestine, colonial media responds with character assassination rather than engagement with the substantive issues.

The broader implications extend to press freedom itself. Young's celebration of parliamentary procedure over truth-telling reveals journalism that serves power rather than challenging it. This isn't press freedom - it's press subservience masquerading as neutrality.

For Māori communities, Young's attack sends a clear message: challenge settler priorities at your peril. The systematic marginalisation of Indigenous voices in mainstream media creates an environment where colonial perspectives dominate discussions of global justice. Young's hit piece reinforces these hierarchies while claiming the mantle of serious political analysis.

Resistance Against Colonial Propaganda

Indigenous protesters gather near Parliament in New Zealand, displaying Māori flags as a symbol of resistance and sovereignty reuters

Young's attack on Swarbrick reveals the true function of colonial journalism - protecting settler power structures while silencing Indigenous voices demanding justice. Her piece demonstrates how mainstream media weaponises respectability politics, parliamentary procedure, and gendered stereotypes to delegitimise Palestinian solidarity.

As kaitiaki of truth, I call on all people of conscience to recognise Young's propaganda for what it is - a desperate attempt to maintain colonial hierarchies in the face of growing Indigenous resistance. Swarbrick's refusal to apologise represents the spirit our ancestors displayed when they signed Te Tiriti - standing firm in the face of colonial pressure.

The connections between Palestinian and Māori liberation cannot be severed by colonial media manipulation. Our solidarity transcends Young's narrow parliamentary focus because our struggles against settler colonialism are intimately connected. When we stand with Palestine, we stand with all Indigenous peoples fighting for their land and dignity.

Young's attack ultimately strengthens rather than weakens the cause of justice. By revealing the viciousness with which colonial media attacks truth-tellers, she exposes the moral bankruptcy of the system she serves. Her choice to attack Swarbrick while ignoring Israeli genocide reveals exactly whose side establishment journalism is on.

The path forward requires rejecting the false choices Young presents - between respectability and justice, between parliamentary courtesy and moral urgency. True leadership means standing with the oppressed regardless of colonial comfort levels. Swarbrick embodies this principle. Young represents everything we must move beyond.

To those who find value in exposing colonial propaganda and supporting Indigenous resistance, the MGL asks you to consider contributing koha to support this essential work. In these challenging economic times, please only contribute if you have capacity and wish to do so: HTDM: 03-1546-0415173-000.

May truth prevail over colonial lies, may justice triumph over settler comfort, and may our solidarity with Palestine continue to grow despite the desperate attacks of establishment mouthpieces like Audrey Young.

Kia kaha, kia māia, kia manawanui.

Ivor Jones, Te Māori Green Lantern

"THE EMPTY TANK: How a White Supremacist Neoliberal Government Left Its Carers on the Side of the Road to Die" - 26 March 2026

“The Pātaka Beside the Strait” - 25 March 2026

"THE PĀTAKA IS ASH: How Nicola Willis and Christopher Luxon Poured Petrol on the Poor and Called It Relief" - 25 March 2026

"THE POISON PEN MINISTER: How Erica Stanford Weaponised the Taxpayer-Funded State Against Her Own Critics — and Why a Wounded Luxon May Be Letting Her Burn" - 25 March 2026