Sloppy Journalism #17-SST impugns Hillary legacy

Adam has been running a series under the generic heading Sloppy Journalism.

Yesterday one of our illustrious Sunday ‘newspapers’, the increasingly silly Sunday Star Times ran a so called ‘story’, on the front page under the headline:-

Sunday Star Times - 15 March

Naturally Adam wondered what the author and disgraced peer had done. So the next couple of paragraph were naturally of interest.

Sunday Star Times -15 March

So the ‘insult’ is that a UK author has written a novel based on a premise that Hillary may not have been the first to conquer Everest.

This is worthy of the front page of a ‘leading newspaper’?

Where is the insult? There is a body of opinion that holds that Mallory may have made it to the top. So what. Hillary made it up and made it down.

Others believe that Tenzing Norgay may well have been the first.

If people want to hold these beliefs they can. It is no insult to Sir Edmund Hillary. Archer has written a novel. Note to the SST by novel we mean a work of fiction. That is by definition something which is invented.

As far taking a swipe at Hillary’s legacy, Adam would suggest that Hillary’s legacy is much more than his Everest climb. His legacy is based in what he did for humanity, especially for the people of Nepal and the confidence he gave in achievement to New Zealand. Hillary’s life and achievements speak for themselves. It is the totality of Hillary’s life including his modesty and approachability which are his legacy. This novel is no swipe at Hillary’s legacy, nor is it a threat..

The swipe at Hillary’s legacy is the SST article which infers that New Zealanders are so lacking in self-belief and confidence as to regard any comment about Sir Ed, that may not accord with the image the SST and others wish to polish and promote, will result in them being offended and upset. It is the SST which impugns the Hillary legacy.

It is interesting that the SST chose to run this article in a week when they and other media have been critical of the Key Government choosing to restore titular honours. One of the comments often made is that we have moved beyond being tied to the ‘mother’ country and have cast off the shackles of the colonial past. The comment has been frequently made in recent days that we are a proud, self reliant and confident nation. This article would suggest otherwise.

Then what do we see, but a quote attributed to Graeme Dingle:-

Sunday Star Times - 15 March

Somehow Adam doubts that in 2009 the English are all that bothered about whether Mallory got there first. After all it was a British expedition, led by John Hunt later Lord Hunt. Dingle’s remark is really rather fatuous. It succeeds in revealing a degree of cultural cringe, coupled with a patronising statement about glorious failures. Indeed when at school in the 1950s, Adam learned about the conquest of Everest by the New Zealander Hillary and Sherpa Tenzing. He recalls no snide remarks about it should have been an Englishman.

Dingle compounds his initial silliness with a second remark, which reveals a rather peculiar , not to say homphobic, view:-

Sunday Star Times - 15 March

So the SST publishes a homophobic comment about two dead men in an attempt to hose down a novel which for dramatic effect takes a contentious view of world history. Archer did not impugn Hillary, the SST does with it’s appalling article.

Not only sloppy journalism, but snide and cheap journalism. A cynic might suggest that the article resulted form good PR by Archer or his publisher for the book.

The only story here is the lack of maturity of NZ media, and the poor choice of comment by Graeme Dingle.  The two together tend to confirm that we as a nation have yet to fully learn from the achievements of Sir Edmund Hillary, K.G.

Homepaddock has commented here. The SST (aka The Spectacularly Stupid Times) item is here.

Again as Adam noted above it is the SST which, in Adam’s opinion, takes the swipe at Hillary and insults the man and the legacy.

Advertisement