Abstract:
Freedom of expression is widely recognised as a right of fundamental importance. However, the level of protection afforded to different forms of expression is not so clear and varies between jurisdictions. This paper examines the tension between political and commercial expression in New Zealand and the United States. Electoral advertising and financing by corporations is used as a case study of corporate political expression, a form of expression at the intersection of political and commercial expression. The case study provides grounding for a comparative analysis of how and why New Zealand and the United States balance political and commercial expression in different ways. This paper compares a number of legal, constitutional, political and commercial factors within New Zealand and the United States to show that the FOE law surrounding electoral advertising and financing by corporations is complex and unable to be explained through reference to one factor. Ultimately, the comparative analysis demonstrates that the Electoral (Finance Reform and Advance Voting) Amendment Act 2010 may not be the final word in New Zealand.
