Who's Having a Good/Bad War ?

[SOMAT]

Nominee for a good War prize is Air Marshal Brian Burridge, the commander of the British forces in the Gulf. I have just read an interview he has given to reporters; an extract reads:

" The UK media has lost the plot. You stand for nothing, you support nothing, you criticise, you drip. It's a spectator sport to criticise anybody or anything, and what the media says fuels public expectation. That may sound harsh, but that's the way it feels from where I sit."

I find it difficult to disagree with any of that;indeed, he has encapsulated my feelings to the proverbial T.

Hopefully, his military, or political, masters back in the UK wont slap him down.

[sprucemoose]

Interesting one, this.

It's frustrating as an objective journalist (well, I think so at least) specialising in defence to be lumped in with the "general meeja" at a time like this. I went out to Saif Sareea II and was surrounded with hacks bent only on hunting out "birds", specultaing about Afghanistan and ploughing up tired stories about poor bits of kit. You will always get those aiming only for negative stories, just like you will get only positive coverage from some titles.

The marines are doing a great job in Basra, and it's bad to hear people suggest that this is only because they've been sitting around for a fortnight. No doubt once this is all over we'll hear that it was always going to be horribly one-sided from armchair generals.

At least our journos have the balls to stay in Baghdad throughout the campaign (unlike their US colleagues) and they are doing their best to feed an insatiable news appetite in the UK. Journalists aren't perfect, but who is?

If you don't like what particular individuals or individual networks are reporting, then don't talk to them, AM Burridge. It works for Alex Ferguson!

[Archimedes]

But it doesn't work for Fergie, spruce - those journalists wanting to make something up go away and do so, while those who feel (often with some justification) that Ferguson's treatment of them is harsh drip and moan about it. Ferguson uses this to his advantage (so we're told) to create a 'seige mentality' among his players, driving them on to better performances.

Brian Burridge (or Brain Burridge as the BBC website called him at the weekend) doesn't have that luxury, I'd argue. If he doesn't talk to particular media outlets, they'll snipe at him - we saw the effect this sniping had on Brigadier Lane in Afghanistan (even if the source of the negative spin was in the MoD). If he refuses to speak to those outlets critical of his performance, we'll be told that he either has something to hide; that this is a sign that things are not going well, etc, etc. Burridge can't do a Ferguson - he can't pin a reporter to a wall and tell him to f_k off. Now admittedly, I can think of one senior officer who would cheerfully do this, but can you imagine the publicity?

[Pilgrim101]

Don't know "Spruce". Our view out here of the media is just forming now and is becoming fairly jaundiced because more and more of us are picking up on the ****e being promulgated (Great old MoD word that, I used it once before in a memo !) by BBC and Sky in particular. I hope we get a chance to see the reruns of all the gaffes and take the piss out of the pundits and "experts" and "lady anchors" who clearly know eff all about eff all !

I won't tell you what we think of the prats on the roof of the Sheraton and Safir Hotels in Kuwait and in the Sky studio with their constant speculation and almost wishful thinking that we don't find any WMD so they can have a headline and go home to stuff TB.

We really object to the sarcastic questioning of Centcom people by pissed off hacks with an axe to grind. When the WMD evidence is being shown on TV I hope all those wimps have the grace to cringe quietly out of the room and keep schtum ! I also hope the rabid Al Jazeera hacks are really pissed off watching us gub their favourite regime.

Next time we go to war we should embed one or two soldiers with the regiments of sodding journalists going up to the front line "fighting" from headline to headline.

[sprucemoose]

Cheers Pilgrim,

Glad to see that it's not only the hacks who are feeling jaundiced during the current campaign; it's been live for just over a fortnight, but our build-up of coverage took about six months. At least we're not getting shot at, mind you!

It's frustrating, because my organisation (I won't name it - I don't want to be accused of cheap advertising) won't let us travel to the region now that it has kicked off, so I have to watch what everyone else is doing. I did get pretty hacked off (no pun intended) with a regular R4 'Today' contributor who spent most of the weekend trying to rubbish 'US troops at Saddam International' and 'US troops in central Baghdad' stories, when they turned out to be true. He truly sounded surprised and put out that the US were going in for PSYOP activities!

I didn't say Ferguson was right, Archimedes, but if Burridge has a problem with an individual then he should raise it with the individual, and not blame everyone. Otherwise he's just Strachan, eh!

[sailtoo]

At last count at least 800 'liberated' Iraqui civilians and unknown military. I wonder why the "coilition of the willing" doesn't include the dead Kurdish 'allies' in the casulties count? Could it be that '****' don't count.
This war is by a couple of small men with big egos.

[G.Khan]

Aren't you so lucky that you live in a society that allows you to express your opinion without any chance of official retribution - no matter how stupid or inaccurate your opinion might be?

[Didntdoit]

As in, 'got no choice. Spruce mate, sorry, but I beg to differ - the Air Marshal is bang on IMHO.

Were he not to give interviews, the press would be up in arms and he would be ordered to sort the issue within. Were he to pick out an individual element of the media, not only would he be acting incorrectly, again IMHO, he would very soon be having to name and shame many other repeat offenders. The list, UK-wise, includes Nicky Campbell (R5), who, as has been said earlier, proved well out of his depth (last week, he was harping on about 'blue on blue' and the fact that it was always the US who were forever getting it wrong, forgetting our own unfortunate tragedy) and cannot ask a single un-biased question. Natasha and Dermot on BBC Breakfast have had a dogs breakfast - this is not Oprah, it's an effing war and real people are dying. John Stapleton and Hilary Anderson - are these two related? Martin Chater - at no time did he question the lack of aircraft wreckage, parachutes etc or indeed, the fact that the animals were shooting into the bull rushes 2 weekends ago (seem like a lifetime). As for overstatement and stupid questions ("so, how are the British troops going to take Basra and what are you doing, waiting for commercial?"), few of the media can take credit for positive collective performance.

So no, he's gotno and is probably in the same situation as Sven-Goran and as Ghoddle found out, when you don't talk to the media, everything you subsequently say will be used against you. Going back to the topic of this thread - I had the pleasure of sitting next to BB at dinner back in November. Yeah, he's doing good and I'd follow him. But then, I'm easily led
:=

[Dan Winterland]

Brian Burridge is correct in what he said about the media, and I admire his balls to have said it - especially as it was direct to their faces knowing that they could report on his words as they wished.

However, the Media can only report what they know otherwise they look for stories or even (dare I say it) make things up! If you feed the media with only little bits and pieces and big media organisation like CNN feels it has to fill a 24 hour programme with nothing but the war, then obviously iethr rhere is going to be a lot of repetition and/or speculation.

Over the last few days, I have laregly been imrisoned in a hotel room (thanks to the outbreak of SARs) with CNN being the only 'watchable' English language channel. It have been amazed by the complete b@allocks the journos have spouted, largely speculative and presumptive. But this is largely due to the lack of info they have been receiving. The breifings are nowhere near as comprehensive aswere in the Falklands, GW1, Bosnia and Kosovo, instead we are largely only being informed of what comes the media's way from the 'embedded' journos and the few Brits who stayed on in Baghdad.

For security reasons (and quite rightly so) the information is being drip fed. As a result, the public are only going to get part of the story. Brian Burridge was correct, but what else can he expect.

[sprucemoose]

Didntdoit,

I don't argue that many TV and radio anchors and pundits are out of their depths, but my gripe is still with BB's quoted use of the blanket phrase: "The UK media has lost the plot". It's like me saying "The UK military is poorly equipped" or "England football supporters are hooligans" - it's a generalisation, and a rubbish one at that.

[Didntdoit]

Spruce

At the risk of digenerating this into a personal arguement that is essentially off-topic, the british military could be much better equipped and resourced in too many areas and too many travelling English soccer fans are indeed, hooligans. As far as the military is concerned it is the abilty to adapt, improvise and overcome that kicks 'a and as for the hooligans, kinda irrelevant in the current thread.

This is not personal but I disagree with you and agree with BB - Joe Public does not get to hear your opinion and abilty to filter chaff from wheat, he is fed too much crap from the anchors, so-called experts and less than informed embeddeds. Cap fits.

[sprucemoose]

Well let's not degenerate then, old chap. You clearly think all journalists are pond life (have we met?!), and there are many out in hot and sandy parts just now doing much to reaffirm your opinion. All I can say is we're not all Sun reporters or Sky pundits!

[Didntdoit]

Spruce mate

You missed the point of recognition - when I said:Joe Public does not get to hear your opinion and abilty to filter chaff from wheat

I was actually refering to you personally, as I had picked up from your previous posts that you clearly know your stuff and more importantly, the difference!

No, we've not met - yet!:D

[sprucemoose]

Sorry Didntdoit, I did miss your point first time round. It is a shame - if Joe Public was reading me I'd probably be making more money!:O

[SOMAT]

Nominee for good War:

Lt Col Time Collins of the Royal Irish for his outstanding speech to his troops at the outset, and his great comportment since.

Nominee for Bad War:

Nicky (I'm holier than thou) Campbell of BBC Radio 5 who has been out of his depth. He is so egotistical that he is always trying to make the news, rather than report it.

[sprucemoose]

I did like one presentation given by a marine whose name escapes me (although he came across as very Hugh Grant).

It went something along the lines of: "I'll bring you up to speed with the battle for Umm .... Umm ... oh blimey ... Umm Qasar"! Good work, fella!

[CaptainFillosan]

Tim Collins is great, and has shown what he is made of - and so have his troops. All the lads have been brilliant.

Brian Burridge is a man who has shown by his body language that he does not suffer fools gladly. You can see him get p****d off as the guy asking the questions gets out of his depth. BB says it the way it is and I for one admire his forthright approach to his job.

Al Lockwood aint bad either. So the Brits are looking good to me.

But we cannot knock the US guys either. Apart from some unfortunate mishaps they have done a good job. Well we got Basra sorted and they will do a good job of getting Baghdad sorted.

All in all a good war. But God bless those who didn't make it.

[SOMAT]

CaptainFillosan

Amen to all that, particularly the last sentiment.

[Arkroyal]

Bit harsh, spruce.

Saw that, and the poor bloke was quite obviously shattered. Looked like he hadn't slept for two days.

Great RM quote on World service radio the other day. About the problems delivering aid in Um whatsitcalled.

We give the water to the strong, and the @rseholes sell it to the weak.

[sprucemoose]

Not a criticism, Ark, it just made me chuckle. You're absolutely right, though, he was out on his feet, so all praise to the guy for briefing the media in such a condition.

[Foss]

Lt Col Collins seems to be having a pretty outstanding war, if there is such a thing.
But Spruce, do you not think Sarah Oliver is having a good one. Her pieces are superb. (She's embedded with the Irish)
Fos

[Gainesy]

Top footage on CNBC of scene in central Baghdad with a large traffic roundabout with M1s and Bradleys all round it. Camera then zoom-pans onto two young Iraqis holding a large "Humanshield" banner, which they had amended to read: "Go Home you Humanshield W@nkers"

:D

[sprucemoose]

Foss, I can't place Sarah Oliver (what's her network)?, but by "pieces", I hope you're talking about her journalism, rather than any anatomical features!:p

[Foss]

Well Spruce,
she said that when she went for a shower with 500 squaddies she was a weapon of mass distraction.
ho ho ho.
Fos
I'll email a piece to you.
(Well I think I did, not sure. edited for being daft)

[Unmissable]

BB is right and unfortunately its going to get worse. Who can predict the quick sell stories that are going to come out in the next few years,? We've already moaned about the kit, Gulf War Syndrome was a decade ago, welfare package is not gory enough. What will be the media slants on this war AFTER THE EVENY. My Guess is:


1. The military's fault for taking journos into dangerous places.

2. The Blue on Blue issue (quite rightly with regards the Patriots) .

3.Military's fault