Editorial: Good to see beginnings of a stigma

Of late,  this newsroom has copped a bit of flack for publishing our monthly drink-driving "list of shame".

Unsurprisingly, most of the venom comes from those lamenting their unwelcome cameo in print.

Despite the fact all of them have stood in court facing a packed public gallery, many see the list, and their inclusion on it, as a breach of privacy.

Open justice, of course, can be brutally open.

But let's get real. Avoiding this list is hardly rocket science - call a taxi or have a few fewer.

A fortnight ago, I received a pointed email from a teenager debuting on the list. It started eloquently with: "Dear Hawke's Bay Today. F*** You."

He launched into a 400 word missive, with the following notable points: "Stop interfering with people's personal lives ... whoever is in charge of printing this you have no idea what kind of inconvenience you have caused ... there are far more dangerous criminals that have been granted name suppression."

Such criticism is indicative of the criminal disposition to claim victimhood. I have yet to meet a convicted drink-driver (and I've met many) who thought their subsequent publicity was warranted.

Those who claim it's their business only, should realise they weren't driving on the back lawn. Like many, I drive on their tar-sealed crime scene every day.

"I didn't need my demons creeping back up on me to bring shame on my family's name in the paper." Unless you're one of the many drink-drivers responsible for taking a life, I'd suggest you know nothing of "demons" or "shame". Far better to feature on this list than in the obituaries.

While the email ended with a resounding, unprintable thump, such anger and shame entails a glimmer of hope. The way I see it, his angst suggests the beginnings of a healthy drink-drive stigma. During my university days in the early 90s, I regret to admit there was little dishonour in the practice.

Hawke's Bay Today will continue to print this list because it's a deterrent, because it's popular, because it illustrates how rife it is but, most importantly, because it may just prevent headlines like last Thursday's: "Booze factor in two road deaths."

The media often hides behind the touchstone of public interest (as opposed to public curiosity) - but there's nothing equivocal about drink-driving. It sits squarely in the public domain.

To the teen who sent me the colourful email, I've withheld your name in this instance and wish you all the best. But rest assured, should you earn a second appearance on the list of shame by again putting other road users at risk, I'll include your photograph (we have one on file) next to your name.

Any sense of public shame associated with this public plague on public roads is, as I see it, necessary to curb it.