what's the core?

Kapuscinski is taken less as an object of reflection and homage than as a point of departure for understanding the current state of reportage and its future.

I mean, what's the gist of the sentence? Whether it's "reflection and homage", which debate on Kapuscinski is about, or "a point of departure for understanding..."

Perhaps someone became acquainted with the structure "to be taken less as... than as..."

Thanks beforehand;)

People do not really think of him as an object of reflection and homage but mostly refer to him as a point of departure for understanding the current state of reportage and its future.