“Deeply offensive.” Sunday Night hits back as Hugh Sheridan criticism grows.
While media question whether the story is "opportunistic" and "self-aggrandising", exec producer says allegations are deeply offensive.
- Published by David Knox
- on
- Filed under News
Sunday Night has issued a statement followed continued criticism of a story on Hugh Sheridan ‘s mercy dash to Nepal in search of his brother, Zachary.
This week social media and commentators have questioned the show’s involvement after Zachary Sheridan was found.
It’s not clear what involvement DFAT had in their attending a disaster zone nor whether Zachary had been registered as missing. Some have even questioned the crew’s Shangri-La accommodation and attempts to hire a helicopter during an emergency.
But Sheridan has urged for donations as the death toll climbs past 6200.
Please donate to Nepal. The situation here is beyond comprehension, so much loss, so many deaths, the… https://t.co/63zNVCAcWa
— Hugh Sheridan (@hugh_sheridan) April 30, 2015
Today the Sydney Morning Herald weighed in:
A well-intentioned and altruistic mercy dash or a cynical and opportunistic media outlet looking to capitalise on incomprehensible devastation?
Perhaps the truth behind the Seven Network’s flagship current affairs program Sunday Night and its controversial mission to Nepal this week to rescue actor Hugh Sheridan’s little brother Zachary from Mount Everest lies somewhere in the middle.
But what is clear is that the Australian public has no appetite for “celebrity” stories during times of immense grief, and no one knows this better than Sheridan and his cohort, celebrity doctor Andrew Rochford, who have sustained the greatest damage to their respective “brands”.
An opinion piece in the Women’s Weekly also said:
Celebrities wield influence, and often that influence can be used for good. Certainly, if his celebrity means more people watch Sunday Night this weekend and are moved to donate to help Nepal – that is inarguably a good thing. But there’s a fine line between shedding light on an unfolding humanitarian disaster and self-aggrandising. And in a world in which social media renders instant judgement (and here, Hugh, let us refer to you to Brendan Cowell’s whiplash), Hugh’s going to want to make sure there are more lingering shots of homeless Nepalese than there are of his artfully-stained white t-shirt and dust-smeared cheek.
Steve Taylor, Executive Producer Sunday Night has since issued a statement:
“A media crew going to a trouble spot and inquiring about transport is not a story. Other media covering the story have done the same.
“We did not hire a helicopter. We certainly did not seek to put ourselves ahead of any local humanitarian effort.
“The allegation that we would put ourselves ahead of the relief effort is utterly wrong, deeply offensive and a shameful claim.
“When Sunday Night began the journey with Hugh Sheridan, his brother had been missing for days and no-one knew if he was alive or dead.
“We sent Dr Andrew Rochford so he could bring his emergency medical skills and expertise to the analysis of the injuries and the medical relief effort and to help where he could.
“Yesterday he was asked by local authorities to a remote quake-damaged community to do just that. Until his visit today the village has so far missed out on any medical attention.
“This is a powerful report about a terrible natural disaster.”
Share
- Tagged with Sunday Night
19 Responses
it comes down to Sheridan was going to Nepal to find his brother, my guess is 7 got in contact, offered to help but only if they could film it, with whatever resources 7 were offering any of us would have agreed.
OK folks if you are reading these comments and the story….please just donate to support the relief effort. To hell with tv execs and their twisted morals…..just donate. Whether you boycott the tv show or watch it…..please just donate regardless.
One proviso, just make sure any donation goes to a legit fund raiser….cheers
“Deeply offensive.” Great description of much of the dribble that seven serves up on its network each day.
This is far too Frontline for my liking. I just don’t believe Sunday Night is giving us the full information.
Either way I won’t be watching it, can’t stand SN or 60min, 4 Corners is so much better.
What is wrong with some of the Australian public, always negative attitudes, if a member of my family had been missing in this type of tragedy I would accept any kind of help to locate them and I think most people would, if by doing this other people can also be helped think its a great thing and at least we will be seeing the devastation from our own TV sources which people will be shocked to see what its like and hopefully donate to this worthy cause. For goodness sake start looking at this with a positive attitude and stop running programmes down before they have even been aired.
Where do people get the energy and time to be constantly outraged and angry? Read an article during the week that called it “lage” (lazy rage). I’m going to save my rage for the real injustices in the world – a story about people (celebrity or not) helping a hand in Nepal isn’t one of them.
Yes, but the irony was that Em choose to write about “lage” rather than one of the real injustice stories. In fact, look back at the topics she has chosen to write since joining Fairfax. Any true global problems there? One of the first was defending her kids being allowed to swear at home. The second was taking a shot at all those who took a shot at that first article and called her a bad mother. Etc Etc.
I should have said newscorp by the way.
I don’t see what all the fuss is about. Ninemsn has been fuelling the fire all week. It is completely relevant for Sunday Night to be doing a story on the Nepal Earthquake, even if finding Hughs brother was the original focus of the story.
The only thing wrong about this article is that it was produced. First of all lets disclose the fact that the Women’s Weekly is a channel 9 magazine and we also have a fairfax journalist giving their two cents in which I am pretty sure fairfax will be merging with channel 9 after the cross media laws are relaxed!
No one seemed to care when Tara Brown interviewed a convicted paedophile on 60 minutes to do with Baby Gammy for a paid interview. No one seems to care when Tracy Grimshaw does a ‘sob’ story and then channel 9 uses the footage to promote ACA during the day.
Nothing more than ‘tall poppy syndrome’ against Channel Seven. Does Paleo Pete ring a bell. Who was running stories first about the paleo diet. Channel 9’s Womens Weekly, big surprise. It’s amazing that Channel Nine love running stories through their media avenues about Channel 10 and 7 personalities but…
I don’t normally file stories on a Saturday afternoon, but given a press release was issued at a most unusual time gave it some attention. This is a topic that has been in the media for much of the week so it’s good to hear Sunday Night’s perspective. Sunday Night has since retweeted this very article.
Women’s Weekly has not been a Nine magazine for several years, owned by Bauer Media.
I don’t see what the issue is? Sunday Night wants to do a story on the Nepalese earthquake and in turn increase awareness and will prompt viewers in donating aid to the region. What are people whinging about?
I feel the same. Obviously Hugh only went to find his brother – I would do the exact same thing – he would hardly have been thinking about it being a media opportunity. Then with Seven going over, it makes sense to me since he is their colleague, I’ve heard of many businesses supporting employees when tragedy has struck. You’re right, if the show encourages people to donate and shows them the reality of the situation then isn’t that a positive thing? And they are getting crapped upon by sending over a doctor?! How awful of them, sending medical expertise to a natural disaster!
You assume the doctor was sent to assist those in need. He wasn’t, he was sent to be part of the reuniting of the brothers and to assist one specific person. I completely understand your point of view and completely accept if it were my kin there I would do all I could however, almost to date, Rochford and Sheridan were holed up in the Shangri-La. Rochford could have flown to Nepal immediately but instead he flew to LA and spent time with Hugh. Then them asking the govt. for a helicopter so they could film the brothers being united. The dismissal of this issue by the exec producer may be expected but then again, so is critique. And they were told “no” hence they didn’t hire one. The whole issue has raised legitimate questions but yes, I do hope the people of Nepal wind up benefiting.
Would SN had gone there if the link to Hugh Sheridan had not come up? Certainly if they were planning to go there and it was coincidental that Sheridan’s brother was missing, no issue. But it seems more the case they are now there and have turned this into a ‘we’re helping generally’ story since there’s nothing to tell about Hugh Sheridan and his brother. I’m a regular SN viewer but certainly won’t be watching this weekend.
I think that’s about the right interpretation given how the events rolled out. I wouldn’t be watching the ep. either.
SN went over before Hugh Sheridan’s brother was found. What would people say if Hugh’s brother had died. Andrew Rochford was on Sunrise a couple of days ago and said he was going out to the regions to help as a medical doctor. I think this will be a great story and I will be watching.
I Iook forward to next Sunday’s show where there will undoubtedly be a story about how Dr Rochford is helping the poor Nepalese people…*sarcasm*