RAF News/Propaganda...?
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2004
Location: England
Posts: 473
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RAF News/Propaganda...?
I have recently noticed the front page of the RAF News. Big headline of how a GR4 flew low and fast saving the day in Iraq. Fair enough one might say. What did 'irk' me was the tiny picture of RAF Regt Flt Lt who won a gallantry award in Afghanistan.
Whilst not wishing to devalue the contribution of the two aviators, it strikes me as a much more headline and newsworthy tale was 'bumped' in their favour.
Maybe I am missing the point but is the RAF News trotting out propoganda to justify the continued use/abuse of Defence Budget cash on loud but ultimately useless Fast Jets?
For the record I am not RAF Regt.
Any thoughts?
Whilst not wishing to devalue the contribution of the two aviators, it strikes me as a much more headline and newsworthy tale was 'bumped' in their favour.
Maybe I am missing the point but is the RAF News trotting out propoganda to justify the continued use/abuse of Defence Budget cash on loud but ultimately useless Fast Jets?
For the record I am not RAF Regt.
Any thoughts?
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Up North
Posts: 801
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I always thought RAF News had more spin and less substance than the sister Service publications, although the Army seem to complain a lot about Soldier. Navy News always seemed to have a bit more debate in it.
The RAF News
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Oxford
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've just been asked to design a new front cover for the next issue of RAF News. I was thinking about a Nobel Tommy standing over a hun whilst a nun watches on
For the record, this is a pointless thread. It sounds like a rant to me, but a personnel one, that has no discussion points at all!!
For the record, this is a pointless thread. It sounds like a rant to me, but a personnel one, that has no discussion points at all!!
Guest
Posts: n/a
?????
Another thread with just enough of a controversial starting post to generate some pointless argument between separate trades within the RAF.
Although I have no experience of the Navy equivalent, RAF News is much ****ter than Soldier, and that is proper ****.
Wonder how long this one will run for........
Although I have no experience of the Navy equivalent, RAF News is much ****ter than Soldier, and that is proper ****.
Wonder how long this one will run for........
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2004
Location: England
Posts: 473
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All
I had no intention in starting a trade 'x' against trade 'y' argument. I was alluding to the possible editorial control over the RAF News by those higher up the food chain. There is considerable debate as to the value of Typhoon and/or JSF. It appeared to me that the publicity given to the GR4 incident was a little disproportionate.
And other than shoehorn themselves onto the odd coalition mission to maintain an appearance of the 'Special Relationship', what do UK FJs bring to the party? Not trying to start a row, just an honest question.
I had no intention in starting a trade 'x' against trade 'y' argument. I was alluding to the possible editorial control over the RAF News by those higher up the food chain. There is considerable debate as to the value of Typhoon and/or JSF. It appeared to me that the publicity given to the GR4 incident was a little disproportionate.
And other than shoehorn themselves onto the odd coalition mission to maintain an appearance of the 'Special Relationship', what do UK FJs bring to the party? Not trying to start a row, just an honest question.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bridgwater Somerset
Posts: 459
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps this thread should be merged with The RAF is Knackered & Nimrod Information / Panorama Mon 4th June (Merged) .
I am sure an example of RAF Propaganda will be seen tomorrow night when Sir Glenn Torpy says "there are no underlying themes".
Er aren't there ?
1 they are all Nimrods
2 They all appear to be connected with fuel
3 if there is no connection that means there are a lot of different things wrong .
I don't know which is the most worrying.
I am sure an example of RAF Propaganda will be seen tomorrow night when Sir Glenn Torpy says "there are no underlying themes".
Er aren't there ?
1 they are all Nimrods
2 They all appear to be connected with fuel
3 if there is no connection that means there are a lot of different things wrong .
I don't know which is the most worrying.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: In a shed
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Grabbers wrote:
Whilst not wishing to devalue the contribution of the two aviators, it strikes me as a much more headline and newsworthy tale was 'bumped' in their favour.
The story of the Regiment officer's bravery first appeared on the front page of RAF News in its January 5, 2007, edition under the headline: Matt wins a Military Cross in Afghanistan. So in this case the Tornado boys story was probably a bit newsworthy as the Regiment officer was receiving his gong at the palace.
As for the respective merits of Soldier, Navy News, RAF News etc, I don't think there's much between em except Soldier carries more letters (probably coz the army is bigger!) and every letter in Navy News seems to be from an old-timer!
Whilst not wishing to devalue the contribution of the two aviators, it strikes me as a much more headline and newsworthy tale was 'bumped' in their favour.
The story of the Regiment officer's bravery first appeared on the front page of RAF News in its January 5, 2007, edition under the headline: Matt wins a Military Cross in Afghanistan. So in this case the Tornado boys story was probably a bit newsworthy as the Regiment officer was receiving his gong at the palace.
As for the respective merits of Soldier, Navy News, RAF News etc, I don't think there's much between em except Soldier carries more letters (probably coz the army is bigger!) and every letter in Navy News seems to be from an old-timer!
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: The US of A, and sometimes Bonnie Scotland
Posts: 549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tappers Dad,
This is not meant as personal swipe; I knew most of the guys in the Sep 06 accident very well, but I'm not convinced getting the Nimrod into this thread is particularly helpful. We all have our opinions (so wish we could all wait till the BOI reports)...I feel dragging XV230 on this thread is uncalled for.
Meant in the best intention
bs
This is not meant as personal swipe; I knew most of the guys in the Sep 06 accident very well, but I'm not convinced getting the Nimrod into this thread is particularly helpful. We all have our opinions (so wish we could all wait till the BOI reports)...I feel dragging XV230 on this thread is uncalled for.
Meant in the best intention
bs
Stand by Betty - it won't be long before WEBF pitches in with a random (spurioius) link to the Future Carrier and Sea Jet threads. After all, it was RAF propaganda that has put paid to both (almost) of these projects!
Back to thread - much of the input to RAF News comes from the units themselves. The more you shout the more you are heard. Brize and Odiham seem to be particularly good at them as dis a certain Norfolk Fin sqn under a previous CO.....
And to be fair to the RAF News they don't shy away from publishing letters that cause discomfort to some staff officers - of note some of the Pay 2000 and JPA "digs" were well focussed on the issues at hand and more likely to be read by VSO than some of the sensationalist drivel on these pages.
Seems to me if you have an issue with the RAF News then write to the editor. They may even withold your name if you ask them nicely. Remember though, to give fair balance, next time one of the Mods steps out of line on the PPRuNe Military Aircrew Forum write to the RAF News to complain.
Is it really Monday tomorrow!
Back to thread - much of the input to RAF News comes from the units themselves. The more you shout the more you are heard. Brize and Odiham seem to be particularly good at them as dis a certain Norfolk Fin sqn under a previous CO.....
And to be fair to the RAF News they don't shy away from publishing letters that cause discomfort to some staff officers - of note some of the Pay 2000 and JPA "digs" were well focussed on the issues at hand and more likely to be read by VSO than some of the sensationalist drivel on these pages.
Seems to me if you have an issue with the RAF News then write to the editor. They may even withold your name if you ask them nicely. Remember though, to give fair balance, next time one of the Mods steps out of line on the PPRuNe Military Aircrew Forum write to the RAF News to complain.
Is it really Monday tomorrow!
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Toeing the line
Roguedent,
Was that a personnel or personal rant ?
Either way you will be lucky to even work for the 'Sun' in future at that rate...
I've just been mildly chastised ( thanks, at least you were reasonable even if we fail to agree ! ) for mentioning the Tornado & Jag' are useless as stated earlier - in fact I would say the Tornado GR4 is just about becoming useful, in a non air-threat environment, for the first time in it's life - the original item would not have lasted a minute in WW2.
How about going around photographing married quarters & detailing the occupant's comments, or interviewing people in the sandpit in a truly anonymous non career-threatening way ?
That would show an unbiased point of view...
Was that a personnel or personal rant ?
Either way you will be lucky to even work for the 'Sun' in future at that rate...
I've just been mildly chastised ( thanks, at least you were reasonable even if we fail to agree ! ) for mentioning the Tornado & Jag' are useless as stated earlier - in fact I would say the Tornado GR4 is just about becoming useful, in a non air-threat environment, for the first time in it's life - the original item would not have lasted a minute in WW2.
How about going around photographing married quarters & detailing the occupant's comments, or interviewing people in the sandpit in a truly anonymous non career-threatening way ?
That would show an unbiased point of view...
TAC Int Bloke
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 975
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the Tornado GR4 is just about becoming useful, in a non air-threat environment, for the first time in it's life - the original item would not have lasted a minute in WW2.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: 250 ft agl
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What was quite entertaining in the latest copy of the RAF News (well the latest I saw as I'm OOA) for me was reading the letters page. In it was a letter from an RAF Cpl, who seemingly wanted to know where he could get a copy of the RAF bikini... for his girlfriend! His name and address had been "withheld". Initially, most people would just carry on and read the next letter, or see who they know in the photos this time.
However, little birdy on the "inside" of the publication had already told me that this letter was made up to try and bolster sales of the emblazoned clothes. Not very impressive!!!
Oh, quick, run! The black transit van is pulling up outside my tent.
SMT
However, little birdy on the "inside" of the publication had already told me that this letter was made up to try and bolster sales of the emblazoned clothes. Not very impressive!!!
Oh, quick, run! The black transit van is pulling up outside my tent.
SMT
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
expounding on theory
Maple 01,
simple really - fly low over a prime target merrily chucking out JP233, and strange as it may seem, Skyshadow etc does not generate a Star-Trek like force field, and the locals may be naughty enough to fire bullets & shells.
Quite a few a few more than necessary unlucky sods from the first night of GW1 should tell you that.
What do you think the Germans would have done in WW2 if a Tornado attacked an airfield or prime site ?
Thrown a lot of lead in the air, radar guided & mostly not, then shot the bloody thing out of the sky...
The Americans learned that in Vietnam.
simple really - fly low over a prime target merrily chucking out JP233, and strange as it may seem, Skyshadow etc does not generate a Star-Trek like force field, and the locals may be naughty enough to fire bullets & shells.
Quite a few a few more than necessary unlucky sods from the first night of GW1 should tell you that.
What do you think the Germans would have done in WW2 if a Tornado attacked an airfield or prime site ?
Thrown a lot of lead in the air, radar guided & mostly not, then shot the bloody thing out of the sky...
The Americans learned that in Vietnam.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: .....................................
Posts: 365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stand by Betty - it won't be long before WEBF pitches in with a random (spurioius) link to the Future Carrier and Sea Jet threads.
