Taking a pot shot at the media – again

JACK MILNER

Long before this sad case Oscar had become a household sports name as a double-amputee who refused to accept his disability. This paralympian became a symbol of how to overcome adversity.

Two issues about the Pistorius affair are relevant to sports people. The first is his (extremely doubtful) sports future and the second are comments made by his agent, Peet van Zyl, about the role of the media. 

After the sentence the International Paralympic Committee (IPC) made it clear that according to its rules, Pistorius will not be allowed to participate at the Rio Paralympics in 2016, even if he is on parole. The ban would apply for the full duration of the five-year jail sentence. He will however, technically be free to compete at the Tokyo Games in 2020.

Pistorius would be almost 34 by the time of the Tokyo Paralympics in August 2020 and it remains to be seen whether he would wish to mount a comeback or whether the SA Olympic Committee (Sascoc) would even consider him.

The IPC declined to comment on Tuesday about Pistorius’ sentence, despite its spokesman, Craig Spence, having done so just before Pistorius was convicted of culpable homicide.

IPC spokesman Craig Spence had said before sentencing, that the IPC wanted to differentiate between what went on in the Paralympic Movement relating to Pistorius and what went on in his private life – which had nothing to do with the IPC.

“Pistorius has been one of the stars of the Paralympic Movement, but a whole host of global and national stars have (since) emerged, as London 2012 showed. The Paralympic Movement has never been about one person, and never will be.”

Van Zyl’s comments are most irritating. During his evidence in mitigation of sentence, Van Zyl extolled the virtues of his client, how much he did for charity and how much he could still have done had it not been for the state and the media.

Prosecutor Gerrie Nel quickly tackled him on the issue, especially his blaming of the state, by asking him if he considered Pistorius to be the victim in this case. Van Zyl quickly backtracked and apologised.

The argument that the media tends to blow everything out of proportion, can easily be countered in the Oscar case by figures given by Carte Blanche executive producer George Mazarakis, who said early indication were that more people watched Oscar’s sentencing on Tuesday morning than watched the Nelson Mandela funeral.

The interest has to be there for the media to get involved. Yes, we may from time to time tend to sensationalise things; yes, we may take what some may think are irrelevant “fringe” issues and put them under the loupe. But that is because the journalist may have seen something others may have overlooked.

It is the ability to look into a microscope and pinpoint the small items that has often led to the exposure of massive corruption.

It is ironic how people quote the press approvingly when they agree, but vehemently knock the same journalist or newspaper when they don’t.

Pistorius was a cash cow to Van Zyl and now that the agent is losing that income, he seems to lash out at everybody else.  

When his client was at the top of his game and was attracting all the positive stories, nobody ever complained about the intrusion of the press.

It remains true: if Oscar wants to know why he has had the worst 20 months of his life, all he needs to do is look in a mirror – not a newspaper.