Are the BBC aviators?
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Wilts
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The best was during the Falklands when the BBC WORLD SERVICE reported that 3 Para was attacking Goose Green 3 hrs before the paras even got there.
The Argie commander of thr falklands in a interview when asked as to why he did not reforce goose said he thought that even the british wasnt stupid enough to tell them they were coming.
NOW YOU KNOW.
The Argie commander of thr falklands in a interview when asked as to why he did not reforce goose said he thought that even the british wasnt stupid enough to tell them they were coming.
NOW YOU KNOW.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Far from the madding crowd
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Add ITV
Just watched the ITV News at 7pm tonight, in the main report on the Puma crash they used a small shot of a Puma and finished with long and close shots of the junglies landing in Serria Leone.
Ah what is the point!! Will they ever realise that not all Mil Helo's are the same.
Ah what is the point!! Will they ever realise that not all Mil Helo's are the same.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: bristol
Age: 56
Posts: 1,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Samuraimatt
That will be BBC Radio 4 then.
I take it that you have never worked for the BBC then.
You may find that the BBC is not very "jointed".
But then if I wanted an aircraft re-fuelled, armed ,and a pilot to fly it for a low level night sortie, I might not get much help from an assortment of snowdrops, MT drivers and cooks.
Having worked for the Beeb, I can tell you there is very little mixing of staff, and the radio four tribe are poles apart from the 24hour news gang
But on the other hand, if you could come up with a scheme to fund the Air Force by licence fee, as per BBC, it would be great. There would be 5 pilot's per aircraft, more aircraft than you could use, load's of stations, and at least 100,000 personnel, (oh, and very cheap, high quality food too).
I take it that you have never worked for the BBC then.
You may find that the BBC is not very "jointed".
But then if I wanted an aircraft re-fuelled, armed ,and a pilot to fly it for a low level night sortie, I might not get much help from an assortment of snowdrops, MT drivers and cooks.
Having worked for the Beeb, I can tell you there is very little mixing of staff, and the radio four tribe are poles apart from the 24hour news gang
But on the other hand, if you could come up with a scheme to fund the Air Force by licence fee, as per BBC, it would be great. There would be 5 pilot's per aircraft, more aircraft than you could use, load's of stations, and at least 100,000 personnel, (oh, and very cheap, high quality food too).
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 868
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah what is the point!! Will they ever realise that not all Mil Helo's are the same.
Did anyone notice how the crash news took about 20 seconds and the rest was all about how the Bliar's overseas policy was justified?
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its not just the BBC. Just watched the ITN news reporting about the 2 RAF helos, whilst they were showing the Junglies Rapid Roping onto the beach in Sierra Leone. That footage must be 4/5 years old now. Wrong helos, wrong service, wrong bloody country. Do no news agencies employ anyone who has any knowledge of the Armed services? I bet if the story was about BA they wouldn't dare show a virgin aircraft, just cos it's a plane. I lost count of the number of times I worked at RAF Culdrose, and that was normally the west country local TV!
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: UK
Age: 55
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Today's Telegraph
'British Army' helicopters despite that photo caption stating the RAF has 33 Pumas.
And 'Pumas are ordinarily operated by the RAF regiment.'
'British Army' helicopters despite that photo caption stating the RAF has 33 Pumas.
And 'Pumas are ordinarily operated by the RAF regiment.'
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Somewhere flat
Age: 68
Posts: 5,568
Likes: 0
Received 46 Likes
on
31 Posts
When I was a lad, the BBC news lasted for about 10 minutes. They reported just the news from the studio with occasional reports from their correspondents on the spot. Additional programmes, such as Panorama then took a news story and gave opinion on the story -they were known as "current affairs" programmes. In these days of 24 hour news, the journalists have become more self important, and their opinion is now taken as news - this is furthered by our politicians who now use opinion to "spin" their message rather than let facts get in the way. I despair at the headlines of a "report that will be published later today". It has all become rather mixed up.
The BBC needs to redefine its programmes to allow those of us who just want to hear the facts to do so. Unfortunately the nanny state will not allow this - how dare we make up our own minds when we should be thinking along the same lines as our so called leaders. George Orwell got it right in "1984". Politically correct new speak and Government spin have taken over from giving us the news in its purest form - just the verified facts as they happened. Please BBC, treat us as adults and let us make up our own minds rather than telling us what to think.
The BBC needs to redefine its programmes to allow those of us who just want to hear the facts to do so. Unfortunately the nanny state will not allow this - how dare we make up our own minds when we should be thinking along the same lines as our so called leaders. George Orwell got it right in "1984". Politically correct new speak and Government spin have taken over from giving us the news in its purest form - just the verified facts as they happened. Please BBC, treat us as adults and let us make up our own minds rather than telling us what to think.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 887
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I prefer Channel 4 News, mainly because their 7pm news is an hour long so they devote more time to each story and seem to cover each very fully. But I really can't tell if they report more accurately or truthfully than any other channel.
But it does often seem that all TV news programmes get their news from the daily papers. Countless times I have heard 'breaking news' on the lunchtime or early evening TV news programmes and then realised that I read all about it in the DT, which went to press at 10pm the day before.
One piece of BBC TV incompetence sticks in my mind. I was watching live coverage of the appalling events of 9/11 and hopping between BBC and ITV. At about 1.55pm BST ITV reported and showed film of the collapse of the second twin tower, but BBC TV didn't report this event until about 2.05pm BST. It might not seem much but they were 10 minutes behind the rest of the world with their so-called live coverage, and so I watched the rest of this drama on ITV. I felt that this was a major pig's ear by the BBC in the coverage of one of the most significant news events of the modern era.
But it does often seem that all TV news programmes get their news from the daily papers. Countless times I have heard 'breaking news' on the lunchtime or early evening TV news programmes and then realised that I read all about it in the DT, which went to press at 10pm the day before.
One piece of BBC TV incompetence sticks in my mind. I was watching live coverage of the appalling events of 9/11 and hopping between BBC and ITV. At about 1.55pm BST ITV reported and showed film of the collapse of the second twin tower, but BBC TV didn't report this event until about 2.05pm BST. It might not seem much but they were 10 minutes behind the rest of the world with their so-called live coverage, and so I watched the rest of this drama on ITV. I felt that this was a major pig's ear by the BBC in the coverage of one of the most significant news events of the modern era.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Civ/HAL/SHY/FYY/PWK/AAS/WAD/AVI/GPT/BZN/BSN/WAD/BAS/FLK/WIT/MND/WAD/WIT/WAD/Civ
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not Just BBC
I was in Afghanistan last year on 24 September.
It came over CHAT (only a matter of seconds after the event) that <callsign> reported that <nimrod callsign> had crashed. As we were unaware of <nimrod callsign>, a quick check of the ATO confirmed that it was a Nimrod<type> and based out of <base>.
For the next 6-12 hours we had to endure umpteen f*c*w*ts/experts on Sky News (and BBC) speculating that the only RAF aircraft in Afghanistan that could carry that many people were C130 and CH47.
As I was working with CH47, everyone was desparate to contact their rellies to say they were OK (Minimise kicked in), but the rellies back in Blighty were also subjected to this inaccurate drivel provided by so-called "military experts" (subjecting the local waterboards Sewage Farms to a surge similar to that experienced by the National Grid when Corrie finishes!)
So, to all broadcasters/media:
Find out the facts first, or state that "there are UNCONFIRMED REPORTS that an UK AIRCRAFT has crashed/UK MILITARY PERSONNEL killed." (and do your best to confirm the UK bit first!!!!)
You should all be aware that with the numbers of personnel moving through Brize and Lyneham each year, speculative reports of bullsh1t like this can cause tremendous mayhem/anxiety/panic/unjustified relief amongst quite large populations of the UK (i.e. See Above, the mil population of Lyneham and Odiham areas as opposed to Kinloss!!!!!!!!). Whilst the NOKs in Scotland would have no doubt been aware of where their loved ones were operating, the last thing they need is for the State (or other - in this case Sky) broadcaster to say that it wasn't their loved ones, when in actual fact it was.
In this era of litigation, how long before Mrs Sqauddie sues Daily Blurb/XTV for the stress caused when thay reported that Soldier Squaddie had been killed, only to find out that it was Soldier Grunt instead!!!
You must remember that Joe Public will say whatever they think they saw/you want to hear in order to gain a fast buck. I would urge you broadcasters to await the official MOD announcement (I'm not saying that this announcement will be 100% factual, but it will give you the releasable facts)
OFF TOPIC
Didn't John Irvine get "Tsunami Correspondant" status in Banda Aceh/Thailand because he happened to be on HOLIDAY THERE AT THE TIME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (I bet the BBC flew him (& Family) home from it)
It came over CHAT (only a matter of seconds after the event) that <callsign> reported that <nimrod callsign> had crashed. As we were unaware of <nimrod callsign>, a quick check of the ATO confirmed that it was a Nimrod<type> and based out of <base>.
For the next 6-12 hours we had to endure umpteen f*c*w*ts/experts on Sky News (and BBC) speculating that the only RAF aircraft in Afghanistan that could carry that many people were C130 and CH47.
As I was working with CH47, everyone was desparate to contact their rellies to say they were OK (Minimise kicked in), but the rellies back in Blighty were also subjected to this inaccurate drivel provided by so-called "military experts" (subjecting the local waterboards Sewage Farms to a surge similar to that experienced by the National Grid when Corrie finishes!)
So, to all broadcasters/media:
Find out the facts first, or state that "there are UNCONFIRMED REPORTS that an UK AIRCRAFT has crashed/UK MILITARY PERSONNEL killed." (and do your best to confirm the UK bit first!!!!)
You should all be aware that with the numbers of personnel moving through Brize and Lyneham each year, speculative reports of bullsh1t like this can cause tremendous mayhem/anxiety/panic/unjustified relief amongst quite large populations of the UK (i.e. See Above, the mil population of Lyneham and Odiham areas as opposed to Kinloss!!!!!!!!). Whilst the NOKs in Scotland would have no doubt been aware of where their loved ones were operating, the last thing they need is for the State (or other - in this case Sky) broadcaster to say that it wasn't their loved ones, when in actual fact it was.
In this era of litigation, how long before Mrs Sqauddie sues Daily Blurb/XTV for the stress caused when thay reported that Soldier Squaddie had been killed, only to find out that it was Soldier Grunt instead!!!
You must remember that Joe Public will say whatever they think they saw/you want to hear in order to gain a fast buck. I would urge you broadcasters to await the official MOD announcement (I'm not saying that this announcement will be 100% factual, but it will give you the releasable facts)
OFF TOPIC
And just out of interest why does everry BBC 'reporter' now get a "Special Correspondant" title?
And I am utterly fed up of the "opinions" of the special correspondants. Who cares? Just report the facts fer fecks sake, and make sure the facts are in fact, fact.
And I am utterly fed up of the "opinions" of the special correspondants. Who cares? Just report the facts fer fecks sake, and make sure the facts are in fact, fact.
Last edited by unclenelli; 15th Apr 2007 at 23:14.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Hook, Hants
Age: 68
Posts: 286
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After sending a slightly intemperate email complaining about the distress caused to service families (mine included) as a result of shoddy, inaccurate reporting, I was informed that the Beeb was not speculating itself - merely reporting other peoples speculation!! Same result but obviously entirely defensible in the eyes of the BBC..............I rest my case
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: East Midlands
Age: 84
Posts: 1,511
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hopeless BEEB
Too much time to fill, too much padding and repetition, uninformed speculation, out of touch 'experts' and so it goes on!
They could save a fortune by not sending a camera crew and reporter to stand outside the Home Office when reporting on John Reid, or to a hospital where some useless footballer is having his metatarsal fixed. Worst to date was an aerial shot, from an expensive helicopter, of a coach taking the British football team (losers!) to the airport from their training ground. Totally irrelevant - it could have been any coach and we couldn't even see the overpaid stubbly wasters who were alleged to be in it anyway!
They could save a fortune by not sending a camera crew and reporter to stand outside the Home Office when reporting on John Reid, or to a hospital where some useless footballer is having his metatarsal fixed. Worst to date was an aerial shot, from an expensive helicopter, of a coach taking the British football team (losers!) to the airport from their training ground. Totally irrelevant - it could have been any coach and we couldn't even see the overpaid stubbly wasters who were alleged to be in it anyway!
Last edited by A2QFI; 16th Apr 2007 at 17:03.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Out in the big bad world
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lack of detail = more heartbreak
unclenelli
I couldn't agree with you more. During Telic 1, when 849 had their tragic accident, the BBC rolled out the stock footage of the junglies assaulting Sierra Leone with the breaking news of 2 Royal Navy Sea Kings collide, all pax missing presumed dead. You can imagine the dismay this caused at Yeovilton and Plymouth; my wife was with friends' wives and many of them were in pieces. The collective sigh of relief when the facts (that's FACTS, for any hacks out there) finally came out was drowned out by the sorrow from Culdrose who thought they were safe, but weren't.
I hate the media with a passion. The vast majority are not reporting for anything as noble the people, only to further their own ends and be first with BREAKING NEWS, regardless of accuracy.
That has set my Monday mood off a treat.
I couldn't agree with you more. During Telic 1, when 849 had their tragic accident, the BBC rolled out the stock footage of the junglies assaulting Sierra Leone with the breaking news of 2 Royal Navy Sea Kings collide, all pax missing presumed dead. You can imagine the dismay this caused at Yeovilton and Plymouth; my wife was with friends' wives and many of them were in pieces. The collective sigh of relief when the facts (that's FACTS, for any hacks out there) finally came out was drowned out by the sorrow from Culdrose who thought they were safe, but weren't.
I hate the media with a passion. The vast majority are not reporting for anything as noble the people, only to further their own ends and be first with BREAKING NEWS, regardless of accuracy.
That has set my Monday mood off a treat.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: In the Doghouse...
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am not defending the BBC - nor do I work for them - but more of a nag at those 'further up the information chain.' I went to a large airbase to photograph an exercise last year, and the last stop on the tour was a long line of aircraft.
"Can we go and look around them," we asked, hoping to photograph the aircraft from different angles, "No,"we were told, we could only photograph them from a distance and that there was no need to look around them because "they are all the same, aren't they?" - and that was from a media officer...
Usually most visits are all spot on, but was quite surprised at what the chap said, fortunately it was all sorted out, after much pleading...
"Can we go and look around them," we asked, hoping to photograph the aircraft from different angles, "No,"we were told, we could only photograph them from a distance and that there was no need to look around them because "they are all the same, aren't they?" - and that was from a media officer...
Usually most visits are all spot on, but was quite surprised at what the chap said, fortunately it was all sorted out, after much pleading...
Last edited by tonyosborne; 16th Apr 2007 at 10:01.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Area 51
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not sure an MCO preventing spotters photographing aircraft is quite the same thing, Media Ops at the operational/strategic end is a completely different ball game.
For me what was telling recently about the BBC was their decision to not produce a 90 minute programme on how Beharry won his VC in Iraq. The reason given was that the BBC did not want to alienate it's anti-war audience.
If that's an attitude they appear content to reveal is it any surprise that they treat the facts relating to the loss of servicemens lives with apparent disdain? I know for a fact, because I know BBC journos, that this is a view not shared by the majority of journos who are very sensitive to the effects of mis-reporting. However the fact that it continues to happen indicates that the BBC is not seeking to mend it's ways and put in place a policy which would see such reports come under more scrutiny before broadcast. If this means that other news channels get the story, albeit innacurate, first, then so be it.
For me what was telling recently about the BBC was their decision to not produce a 90 minute programme on how Beharry won his VC in Iraq. The reason given was that the BBC did not want to alienate it's anti-war audience.
If that's an attitude they appear content to reveal is it any surprise that they treat the facts relating to the loss of servicemens lives with apparent disdain? I know for a fact, because I know BBC journos, that this is a view not shared by the majority of journos who are very sensitive to the effects of mis-reporting. However the fact that it continues to happen indicates that the BBC is not seeking to mend it's ways and put in place a policy which would see such reports come under more scrutiny before broadcast. If this means that other news channels get the story, albeit innacurate, first, then so be it.
Didn't John Irvine get "Tsunami Correspondant" status in Banda Aceh/Thailand because he happened to be on HOLIDAY THERE AT THE TIME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (I bet the BBC flew him (& Family) home from it)
As an aside, on the BBC One O'clock News today there was a piece about an inquest/enquiry into a Sea Knight crash with UK fatalities a while back. The footage was of a....Sea Knight. Maybe they are getting better...
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
I'm afraid nothing changes.
Soon after the Brixton riots of 1981, I went with a composite squadron from 21/23 to Florida, and the NG Ranger battalion sent their best (!) to Brecon for a fortnight.
Though the Regt was never named, an enterprising journo from the Grauniad put two and two together and made 271. He assumed that we and other TA units were going to be trained by the NG to support the civil powers, and that the TA would be on the streets of the UK backing up Plod should a Brixton kick off again.
Total load of cock, as in fact we were trying (in vain) to impart some LRRP skills to an amiable bunch of guys whose idea of a tab was a stroll from the far side of the parking lot to the all-you-can-eat diner.
I've always added (or taken off) about 50% fudge factor for most of what I read or hear in the press ever since.
Soon after the Brixton riots of 1981, I went with a composite squadron from 21/23 to Florida, and the NG Ranger battalion sent their best (!) to Brecon for a fortnight.
Though the Regt was never named, an enterprising journo from the Grauniad put two and two together and made 271. He assumed that we and other TA units were going to be trained by the NG to support the civil powers, and that the TA would be on the streets of the UK backing up Plod should a Brixton kick off again.
Total load of cock, as in fact we were trying (in vain) to impart some LRRP skills to an amiable bunch of guys whose idea of a tab was a stroll from the far side of the parking lot to the all-you-can-eat diner.
I've always added (or taken off) about 50% fudge factor for most of what I read or hear in the press ever since.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Adminisphere: FL Nosebleed
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You have a choice
Don't have a TV, don't pay the license fee! I haven’t had a TV for 11 years and I don’t miss it. And the first time I saw Sky News I thought it was an unfunny episode of Drop the Dead Donkey.
To be serious, over the years I have occasionally worked with reporters from different news organisations and they have generally been excellent. But, the men and women on the ground are being driven by agendas from editors and producers etc, and it seems to be getting worse (24 hr rolling news etc, as discussed above).
One little gem I picked up was that even radio news is driven by the visual – the story that gets picked up is the one with pictures (even if they use pictures of the wrong aircraft or just talk about them). And they can get much more mileage out of survivors than fatalities – we saw that last week.
The other thing is often forgetten is that some reporters are in the front line, trying to report accurately. And they take casualties – Frank Gardner survived, his cameraman didn’t. It seems that Alan Johnston may have been killed. I hope his report on Gaza is still accurate: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/6459521.stm
To be serious, over the years I have occasionally worked with reporters from different news organisations and they have generally been excellent. But, the men and women on the ground are being driven by agendas from editors and producers etc, and it seems to be getting worse (24 hr rolling news etc, as discussed above).
One little gem I picked up was that even radio news is driven by the visual – the story that gets picked up is the one with pictures (even if they use pictures of the wrong aircraft or just talk about them). And they can get much more mileage out of survivors than fatalities – we saw that last week.
The other thing is often forgetten is that some reporters are in the front line, trying to report accurately. And they take casualties – Frank Gardner survived, his cameraman didn’t. It seems that Alan Johnston may have been killed. I hope his report on Gaza is still accurate: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/6459521.stm
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK, for now.
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You only have to look at any major article on the BBC website to see how far standards at the BBC have fallen. Not aviation related, but the current headline is the quite horrific story about the 22 dead in the US university shootings today. The article is quite informative and pretty well written, but right at the bottom there is this:
Are you in the area? Did you witness the shootings? Send us your comments and experiences using the form below. If you have any pictures or video you can send them to yourpics@ bbc.co.uk.
If nothing else, it typifies how little the media care about those about whom they are reporting, when in the very midst of reporting what is a huge tragedy for hundreds of people they are still sniffing round for a scoop.
Shame on you, BBC.
(Edited for poor syntax)
Are you in the area? Did you witness the shootings? Send us your comments and experiences using the form below. If you have any pictures or video you can send them to yourpics@ bbc.co.uk.
If nothing else, it typifies how little the media care about those about whom they are reporting, when in the very midst of reporting what is a huge tragedy for hundreds of people they are still sniffing round for a scoop.
Shame on you, BBC.
(Edited for poor syntax)