In this particular case, it's clear that a journalist has been found wanting - whether through ignorance, accident or malice.
It's equally clear that mutual misunderstanding and incomprehension between the Armed Forces and civilian society as a whole, and journalists in particular, will only serve to make such problems more common.
I therefore make no apology for taking Soddim to task for his silly, largely groundless and offensive tirade, nor for poking fun at his spelling of the word credence.
"Unfortunately, misquoting and twisting the facts is stock in trade for most journos". (This was the statement which turned the thread into a slanging match).
A more open approach to dealing with journalists, with "How much can we tell him?" as its basic principle, rather than "How little can we tell him" would be of enormous help in winning trust and in helping journalists do their jobs properly. If left in an information vacuum, journalists will inevitably try to get what they need, and in doing so will get things wrong, and sometimes, (as seems to have been the case here) over-step the bounds of civilised behaviour. That's never excusable and I don't condone it for a moment.
There ought to be more understanding that there are good, well-motivated, sympathetic journos along with the bad apples, and people should perhaps try to be less inclined to leap to conclusions on the basis of their prejudices about the press.
If anyone has any concrete details about who this journo was, or who he was representing, then some of the journo Pruners would, I'm sure, be happy to look into it.