Even in his final hours he fronts the camera to show us all what being near death is like My wife remarked "why would you do it". The answer is pretty clear.
All during his career, Holmes brought to living rooms the storeies that were human-based. It can't be easy living your life in a fishbowl, but that was necessary for Holmes, and his style of broadcasting.
Sure, he had some dodgy moments. But so bloody what. And he wasn't very tough on Prime Ministers on Newstalk ZB during the regular 7:40 slot on Mondays.
Yet even facing death, Holmes fronts the camera to bring to us the reality we all have to face up to. And that, for me, is the mark of Holmes as a broadcaster: he brought us the realities. Every day. And night. He used to irritate me many times, but at others I was absorbed by him. But I'm probably a soft-cock in most people's eyes.
So where is this leading? Easy really.
The shit-for-brained lowlifes at Kiwiblog. Here are some samples:
Sorry.I don't think it matters whether you like Holmes, or not. The man is a Knight. He is dying. He is showing us what death is like. He has a wife. And kids. And other friends.
Even considering that Holmes is apparently on his death bed, I’m afraid I cannot share in the reverence.
Holmes is one of a breed of Progressives (John Campbell is another) who because of their lack of political objectivity, have poisoned the well of journalism for generations.
We owe Holmes no chivalry. His legacy is a once reputable profession brought into utter disrepute.
That is the harsh truth.
Agree with Redbaiter – Holmes as a journo was an obnoxious little sh*t and I can’t for the life of me see what he has done to deserve a Kthood
In fact, he seems to have pressured others to get it – see this quote from this morning’s Herald
“The next day, Holmes spoke passionately to her of his desire for a honour. “He did a straight pitch for a knighthood,” a source said.”
Sad he is ill but I don’t think he contributed much to NZ. In the end, it was and still is all about himself
Holmes is just one big ball of ego, like many media people. His concern for “his people” only extended to self promotion by appealing to popular sentiment. He is no better, or worse, than other presenters in that regard. Certainly he should not be knighted for it.
If Holmes had done his job right, there is no way Helen Klark would be asking Key to give him a knighthood.
Holmes is just a self-promoting dickhead. He didn’t “change the scene” – the scene changed, and he was a presenter for a new format of TV show. Just because the guy’s dying doesn’t mean we have to act as though he was great. He wasn’t. He’s just another presenter – and we’ve had hundreds of them.
SHOW SOME FUC*ING RESPECT TO A DYING MAN YOU MINDLESS FUC*WITS. IF YOU HAVE NOTHING NICE TO SAY (AND IT'S CLEAR YOU DON'T), JUST KEEP YOUR THOUGHTS TO YOURSELF.
That feels better. At times like this I am embarrassed to be part of the blogosphere.
I'll leave the last word to David Garrett, who also commented on Farrar's blog post. And remember, he is from the "hard right".
I was interviewed by him twice, some years apart, and on quite different topics. He was very well briefed, and allowed the questions to be answered, unlike the dreadful Mary Wilson, Sean Plunket, Campbell, and others who would think themselves far superior journalists than Holmes was. His passing will leave a hole.