MOD Press Office - Army-centric

Discussion in 'Royal Naval Reserve (RNR)' started by SimpleReservist, Oct 8, 2014.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. How do we get the MOD Press office to give a balanced view of what the RN actually does?
    700 troops? Pah, i suppose the Argus is commanded by a Colonel, crewed by privates and the junglie merlins are flown and maintained by the AAC?

    And MODs, yes this is a navy-wide drip, not just RNR, but as I'm a reservist,,I want to rant to my fellow reservists (who probably won't read "current affairs" bit of the main topics). :).
    • Excellent Topic Excellent Topic x 1
  2. You can't even get reservists to check the current affairs forum so I don't know how you expect us to change the MOD. lol.
    • Like Like x 2
  3. Purple_twiglet

    Purple_twiglet War Hero Moderator

    It is balanced - there is a lot of work that goes into getting accurate and proper media out there, but you have to balance what is of public interest, what the media want to carry and what is an upcoming news article.

    Bluntly moaning about this sounds a bit childish to be honest. There is a difficult balance to be struck and to be honest, one only had to look at the type of press releases covered on the rn website every week to realise that little ever really gets picked up by the press.

    Also if you spot factual errors then let defence comms know and they will usually correct it in a hurry.
    • Funny Funny x 1
  4. Plenty of papers today are applauding the Army for sending soldiers over, although it could be seen as petty that the RN is not acknowledged it has bigger implications potentially. Head to the pub and people natter about how it is criminal the government have cut Army numbers and made loads redundant, the RN seems almost forgotten. Which is fine in the pub, but the reality is that politicians do what will get them votes, and if (miracles happen) they decide to up the defence budget or at least not slash it anymore- you need the public to support more funding for the RN. At the moment the majority of people have no clue that personnel spend so much time away and that is only increasing, they genuinely think you sit comfortably in dock (most of my friends were amazed that even in home port you live on ship- and they are mostly from military families) and go on nice jollies in a safe warship for part of the year every now and then. Often hear 'well what do they do in port? What a waste'.

    The issue does come up in a manifesto or debate by some miracle and what happens? Spend on the army! They do loads, like offered help with Ebola! So useful! 'Promotion' in the media doesnt have to be about a pat on the back, its about getting recognition for work done and getting the public to realise actually, its also atrocious what has happened to the RN and support is needed to pressure the government to rethink their savings plan.
    • Like Like x 2
  5. To be fair.....

    The link does read (précis) 750 military personnel.....and ALSO the RFA Argos. So perhaps the RFA is in addition to the 750?

    Anyway RFA crews are not military, so they might be in addition to that too?
    Hair splitting serial complete.

    Meanwhile: FLS in Freetown anyone?
  6. Check the papers today though 'army personnel' wahhhh. Pretty sure one article online said something about rfa argus with army personnel. A section of the public with no military connections or proper interest is quite erm- not sure of the word- clueless? As its not a HMS wouldn't be wholly surprised if some had no idea what it was.

    Justice for the RN in da papers.
  7. The BBC called it RAF Argus this morning. Still civie crewed then.
    • Like Like x 2
  8. Funnily enough, Sky news did the same thing last night.
  9. It does seem that everything is "Army" in the papers news etc but it is the press at fault in the majority of cases.
    As Purple Twiglet has pointed out, a lot of effort is spent getting the press release right with the correct details, there are lots of cases where the press is the one who substitutes a Royal Navy for Army or Royal Marine for soldier etc. it is not the fault of the people responsible for press at MoD, but the press who seem to auto correct the release as stated above.
    There is blame to be placed but it needs placed at the correct door!
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Yeah it is 100% the media, cant figure out if its just lazy ie) yeah probably army just put that in- or if there is some weird media agenda. Either way judging by ships' open days and stuff people do have an interest in the RN, so it would still sell their precious papers telling the truth.
  11. I feel lazy is the operative word, R3.
  12. Wait until they get out to Sierra Leone and the media are shown the affected area from one of the three embarked Merlin helicopters from 820 Naval Air Squadron and meet their RNAS CULDROSE-based aircrew and engineers. Hopefully, there won't be the need to paint "This one's Royal Navy!" on the underside like they did in the late 1970s when the TV and press kept misrepresenting RN SAR helos as RAF.

    Last edited: Oct 9, 2014
    • Like Like x 1
  13. I didn't think the original BBC article was that unbalanced. The media tends to generalise with "troops" rather than listing all those involved because it's simply less wordy.

    Yes, journalists can be lazy. But the Army used to get very upset when reporters called the Scorpion a "light tank" rather than a "Combat Vehicle Reconnaissance Tracked" - and you could see the hacks' point.

    In this case, according the MOD website, the original news release used the word "troops" but elaborated with "army medics, Royal Navy Merlins and RFA Argus".

    RAF Argus? I chuckle at that one, but I've seen it before when RFA ships are described by slipshod journalists whose involvement with military or naval matters is not frequent. Not really excusable, though - but no worse than those who should know better calling the ship "RFA Argos" !!!
  14. There is a facility on the BBC website to report "drips" and inaccuracies, if you feel that strong, copy your RR posts onto this facility, I've done it a few times and they do change them.

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    • Like Like x 1
  15. They do usually respond to corrections but it's usually around 90% of the initial exposure time that people actually notice. It's a bit like apologies and corrections for Page 1 inaccuracies appearing a few days later at the bottom of Page 3.

    Many years ago, I was a regular "error reporter" to that Defence Focus rag. They sometimes did bury the correction somewhere in the following month's issue but I doubt that it made much difference. Maybe it's a just drip to whatever the Press Complaints Commission is called this week?
  16. I have the same drip with my sister, she is BBC executive producer, her answer is the BBC is full of graduates who haven't got a clue what's happening in the real world.

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    • Like Like x 1
  17. I was reading todays SUN earlier (no, not usually, but it's all there was in the coffee shop). The two accredited jornos to their article correctly announced that three Merlin have been sent together with (wait for it) 120 pilots!!

    Is it me? Or might have the average bod not felt that forty pilots per cab might be a little over-manned? As said above, that's just lazy.

    Sadly the day of the proper War/Defence Correspondent seems to be over.

  18. Loafing gits.
  19. They have handed the green ones over so no need for that many pilots per airframe, also holiday inn will be issuing a profit warning

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Last edited: Oct 9, 2014

Share This Page