Be The Best
 

.... Or rename the recruitment campaign "Be The Cheapest"?

I've been reading this story, who are the target audience? and why do they object so strongly to the straight forward inspiring message 'Be the Best'? also, what's so objectional about the crossed swords emblem?:confused:

FB:)

Be the Best. Or if you can't, join the Army! (well someone had to post it!)

‘Be the Best’ smacks of elitism apparently. I have no words....

But they are elite. We may not have the biggest, or the best equipped military in the world, but in terms of personnel, we do still have the best.

Merry Christmas to all the guys and gals in all branches of out uniformed services.

Be The (second) Best


From Jet Blast

Some idiot who has nothing better to do than "manage change" or some other guff title. They have to find something,anything to change to keep their job

The Senior and Junior Services got there first.

The Navy with a new Ensign insignia that was a flutter. And the RAF and new FONT FFS. I know the latter had some subliminal message but I know it cost £Kkkkk at least.

What was wrong with the traditional crown and eagle? Did some CS get a bonus?

Same with that super display concept, let's have two displays, Abingdon and East Foirtune and get a professional organiser to set it up. Like the military have only done Earls Court and BoB displays for decades.

I still remember an RNR/RMR display in Birkenhead docks with MTBs and divers.

I heard that the new logo was really quite good...:E
https://www.arrse.co.uk/community/da...f77ce99714.jpg

B Word. That flag is the wrong way up.

P N We are in distress are we not?
We have to get rid of this touchy feally PC bolleaux everywhere.

I thought it pretty scandalous that the Army refuse to be drawn on who their "target audience" actually is...

I always though it a very inspiring and inclusive slogan personally.

Distress, I think not. Traditionally flag staff is to the left, and that is where the broad white band is uppermost. However, IMHO the depiction is pretty awful as the differences between broad and narrow white bands is pretty hard to judge. Were my son not one, I would ban all graphic designers!

Makes the £100k the RN spent on the straightened ensign seem like a bargain!

General Nick Carter at it again - the most politically correct career general, not a fighting man's general.

Carter has been a disaster and the poorest COGS I have been aware of. Aside from his clearly playing the political game extremely well, I do wonder how he has achieved his position.

His mission has concentrated on all the PC goodies: 'inclusiveness', 'equality', LGBT 'issues'.

The man's liberalism has diverted him from the primary aim - to produce and administer a fighting arm that, when called upon, will kill nation's enemies or, when tasked, look after UK peace missions.

The emasculation of the UK's forces over the past 25 years has resulted from 2 generations of politically-driven senior officers of which Carter shines as their liberal best.

The one thing that has always struck me about the service chiefs, is how quiet the RAF ones are!? Whatever the axe to grind the Naval services and Army chiefs can often be relied upon to draw the spotlight toward themselves; Sir David Luce, Sir Nigel Essenhigh, Lord Boyce for the RN & RM, Sir Richard Dannatt, Lord Richards and now Sir Nick Carter from the Army. The difference being, all but Sir Nick have tried to defend at least their specific service from Government cuts, Sir Nick, as observed, seems to want to do so by trying ways to attract people who ordinarily aren't interested by trying to make the Army seem as unlike itself as possible. All, presumably, in order to improve recruitment statistics. The current figure of a standing Army of 78,000 is reportedly, 14,000 shy of the target figure and recently Gavin Williamson's good friend and former Defence Secretary, now Custodian of the nation's central piggy bank, has suggested an Army of no more than 50,000 would suffice! It may well be for the best that Mr Williamson isn't getting on with messers Carter and Hammond?!

FB:)

We can 'expect' more news but I for one do not 'look forward' to it............:-(

If one employs an 'image consultant' to advise on your image, of course he's going to tell you it's wrong and then ask for a shed load of money to change it.

The Army could have done better to run a competition and encouraged the squadies and squadesses to offer ideas - perhaps the generals were afraid that this might lead to an Army equivalent of 'Boaty McBoat Face'.

A couple of month's ago the Daily Telegraph published a letter from Colonel Southby-Tailyour ('cuse the spelling). He was responding to a suggestion that the forces needed to reflect the wider community from which they are drawn - S-T pointed out a host of reasons why that was the last thing we needed in our forces!!!!!!!!!

Old-Duffer

This story has really 'gripped' me.

Firstly, if the 'Market Researchers' really think that being proud of at least striving to be 'The Best' is so wrong, maybe we can transport them to the Front Line and place them with a unit that 'hopefully' will be good enough to survive contact with the enemy....if not, well, at least it was a diverse and inclusive bunch....

Secondly, if the Army has wasted a single penny on this pettyfogging, those responsible for corporate image should be sacked...and I include the very top echelons. Perhaps each should remember the moral courage and pride instilled during officer training, wonder why they have individually lost that over the years of 'brown-nosing' to get to the top, and either have a word with themselves or do the decent thing of stepping aside so proper leaders can take their places.

This highlighted for me all that is wrong with the Forces....Lions led by Donkeys, most of whom are keen to be knighted or further ennobled rather than to do what is right. Like promoting caricature of like must stop or we will fall into the moral abyss.

For the first time in my life, I feel a letter to the papers 'coming on'.....