IN 2003, Sinn Féin overtook the SDLP as the largest nationalist party in the North of Ireland. Since then the party’s electoral trajectory both north and south has been, for the most part, pointed skyward. Even when there have been bad days for the party, its position as a formidable force in contemporary Irish politics has been safe.

That is quite an achievement for a party that since 1923 has suffered from the impact of partitionism, censorship, political vetting, physical attack and campaigns of murder against its members, its representatives, and their families. There is no other party on the island that can point to the overt and covert attempts to destroy it, and yet still it survives, and in latter years thrives.

For those who know republicanism, this is not news or a mystery. It reflects, whether you like them or not/agree with them or not, the history makers and strategic thinkers that have made up its ranks, and its model of patriotism and public service that has been in its DNA. The stubborn refusal of most of the so-called commentariat to understand Sinn Féin, despite its political influence, is the real mystery.

Last week, the passing of republican Ted Howell caused multiple headlines in multiple newspapers calling him a “shadowy figure”. This was an extraordinary, lazy and incompetent analysis as one of the most important political figures in contemporary Ireland passed. It seems that the local media were incapable of recognising that a republican might be significant, important and influential but not in the public gaze.

Of course, there are similar respected figures that make up the British and Irish establishments, whose names we sometimes know, and often don’t. Ted Howell’s name was, however, well known. Anyone who cared to understand the workings of Sinn Féin and its strategic development would be well aware of his position, as his contribution was in plain sight. That he did not need public acknowledgement and the gratification of likes on Facebook to reflect that public service should have spoken to qualities of humility and strength of character, rather than invoke sinister imagery.

When Conor Murphy declared his intention to stand for the Seanad last week there were some that diminished this move as the party putting Mr Murphy out to pasture. This not only flew in the face of reason but was again such a clear misunderstanding of Sinn Féin. Obviously, Sinn Féin has placed the matter of Irish unity at the top of its priority list for the incoming role of opposition in Leinster House. Obviously they needed significant gravitas for whosoever was going to bring a “northern” voice to this debate in the houses and that they chose someone with the experience of Conor Murphy, who has been a peace negotiator and a minister attending inter-departmental and inter-governmental meetings and negotiations demonstrates a statement of intent.

Indeed it is a move not dissimilar in significance to the decision by Gerry Adams in 2010 to step down as MP for West Belfast and stand for election for a TD seat in Louth.

The failure of some in the mainstream media to understand Sinn Féin, despite its position in Irish politics, is lazy and deliberate. You don’t have to like or understand the party to engage with its strategy and understand it. But failing to do so is failing to do your job.