I've read the article and overall it's not that bad. I've done plenty of climbs in NZ, backed off Cook 3 times due to both Weather and my own doubts once (when attempting White Dreams on the South Face). The reporter is giving his opinion as a guided climber, it's blatantley obvious he has done no mountaineering without one, and yes, people have got it right when they say he is in no position to question why they chose the climb they did.
I was going to try the Zubriggen ridge a few years ago and spoke with a very reknowned NZ climber about the route, he told me it was like running the gauntlet as there's a constant amount of rockfall, and not little pebbles. We didn't choose a different route because of this, we decided on the South Face for other reasons.
We, who push the boundaries and take on these routes know what dangers they hold, and we still take the mountain on, on it's terms. Many people have died on the Linda route, it's the 'easiest' on Cook, but still they perish.
4 months ago my partner and i returned to Pioneer hut in a similar (probably worst state) than the brothers returning after their Aspiring climb. It's a welcome relief when there are people in a hut willing to cook and brew up for you. It's an unwritten law after someone's had an epic day.
His line about underestimating NZ's mountains is true, and it comes across like he was relating it to the parties involved in the story, i'm sure he was generalising, and as a reporter should really proof read what he writes before publishing.
Like i wrote before, he's never climbed without a guide so doesnt understand about climbign as a pair, having your partners life in your hands, putting your life in his hands, the bond it has and the elation (after the despair of returning to a hut broken). Feeling like you never want to put crampons on ever again, then sitting in a pub sipping a beer and planning the next climb.