this is not a blog post

David Cohen



Honorifics and the news media

David Cohen | Friday December 4, 2009 - 07:27pm

Tradition has gone out the classroom window as an increasing number of primary schools allow children to address teachers by their first names, reports Michael Fox — or should that be just plain Michael? — over on the Stuff website:

The move away from honorifics - reflected across other aspects of society too - has sparked debate among education experts. Teachers say it removes an unnecessary level of authority and encourages more curious and questioning students. …
 
Wellington's Mt Cook School principal Sandra McCallum said using Christian names changed the learning dynamic. Instead of passively accepting what they are told, children are not overawed by authority and are more questioning. "The old adage that children are there to be seen and not heard - that has changed," she said.
 
Setting aside the question of how widespread this reported trend actually is, the piece does touch on a theme of some interest in respect of the local media, which if anything appear to be more confused when it comes to the use of courtesy titles than the tiny tots at Mt Cook School.  
 
In the New Zealand Herald, for example, sportsmen, authors and entertainers are almost never referred to with an honorific. This is true even where their names occur in purely civic or political roles. Yet elected officials almost always receive a title, although it sometimes depends on whether they show up in the news or feature pages.
 
The same paper's business section appears to have a dollar each way by using titles for most political leaders but dropping them in the case of corporate leaders. We say "most" political leaders because the Herald still identifies the country's last premier in all references as "Helen Clark," an awkward locution originating from an edict by Clark to the current editor, Tim Murphy, as a younger political reporter, in the course of a profile of the then new Labour party leader in 1993.
 
A headline in today’s print edition of the Herald also refers to broadcaster Paul Henry simply as “Paul.”
 
But the situation at the Herald and some other papers is small beer compared to public radio, where there is at least as much confusion over courtesy titles as there is utter studio mayhem when it comes to first names and surnames.
 
In the course of almost any National Radio interview, guests on the current affairs shows will find themselves being addressed every which way: by title, first and last name alike. With Maori guests, the situation is made more confounding by the "convention" — actually an in-house gimmick at most no more than a few years old — that to conduct an interview on anything but first-name basis is tantamount to an act of cultural abuse.
 
Still, as the French might put it, such confusion has reason. The country's media outlets lurch around a bit in this area because the wider culture does as well, and not just at the primary schools. Many New Zealanders will not, or are afraid to, use honorifics in everyday life, even in their formal dealings with people they do not know, on account of a deep-seated commitment to indiscriminate informality.
 
To insist otherwise — to address strangers using their honorific and to expect them to address you similarly — is seen as marking oneself as a hopeless snob.
 

In an essay published some years ago in the Washington Post, American journalist Jonathan Yardley railed against the trend, arguing that far from enriching social interaction it positively trivialised it. As for honorifics: "There was a time, and it was not so long ago, when the abandonment of honorifics meant a significant alteration in a relationship: two people who had theretofore called each other 'Mr' declared, by deciding to use first names, that acquaintanceship had become friendship, with all the possibilities for true intimacy and mutual reward that friendship offers."

 
All that’s changed of course, but it’s probably not a change for the better — and the kids at Mt Cook School aren’t the only on s feeling confused.

 

Follow NBR on Twitter

Comments

Honorifics

It is a strange and confusing world indeed. Two of my three adult children call me "Dad", which I prefer, while the third calls me "Kev" which rankles. All four of my grandchildren call both myself and my partner by our first names which we are very comfortable with. Figure that out.Kevin Murray

Posted by Kevin Murray at 12:57 pm on December 07, 2009

Where is the JACKSON Report?

Hi David, congrats for being one of the best "ferret" journalists in this country. Tthought I'd like to mention the fact that the Peter Jackson Report on the NZ Film Industry, if memory serves me right, was due last month, and has not appeared yet.

Maybe Government are worried what it says, and has not released its findings. In the light of Jackson's latest "The Lovely Bones" getting a fear roasting from the World Critics, it all may be a bit close to home.
Cheers, Carson P

Posted by Carson Patterson at 03:04 pm on December 07, 2009

Post new comment

The information entered here will appear with your comment.
Leaving this field blank will default to anonymous.

More information about formatting options