General Chat

There is no way out now for the Royal Family, is this how wars begin? one country letting down another.
janet

by revealing Harry was in a war zone, not only his life was put in immediate danger, but also the lives of his fellow soldiers

Hello Jean, I just added the site addy to my reply as I thought someone might like to have a look....

Rose xxx

Thank you Rose.

I wonder how many people on this thread will scream bloody murder if, and when, the press decide "to co-operate with the Government" in future and keep quiet about news items.

Whatever happened to freedom of the press.

Jean.

Our British press did well to keep it quiet. It was unfortunate that the foreign media could not have kept it to themselves, too.

Once it had been publicised in an Australian magazine, it could not be long before the news spread around the world.

from googling...(American troops in Afghanistan)

"Six GIs killed in ambush, raising number of Americans killed in '07 to 101"
( http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21718436/ )

just a gentle reminder that all Americans are not just sitting at home 'bragging'....

Rose x

Jean.

You've taken the words out of my mouth..

Can't mind their own business.

Trust the Americans they are always bragging that everything they have is big incuding their GOBS when will people learn to keep them shut.

With respect, Chris, it was actually yourself who first brought up WWII reporting and I was responding to that. I fail to see how I am deviating from the thread.
The thread is also about media reports with reference to conflicts. In this instance, a report about a member of the royal family being in Afghanistan.
As far as WWII reporting is concerned, newsreels WERE shown prior to events taking place sometimes.

There are those on this site who not only remember WW2 but who played an active role in it. As usual you deviate completely from the thread as you did last night. I am signing off.

um... where else would my knowledge come from? lol
My knowledge of WWII reporting comes from my own training in part.
The main reason that there was a timelapse between an event and reporting was because of the technology. Many of the Press Corps were actually reporting from front lines.
Current warzone reporting is subject to very strict guidelines and is based very heavily upon intensive briefings from the forces.
If the media did not adhere to those guidelines we would see an end to any cooperation from the forces and the government.
However, there is more of an immediacy now because of the technology involved and utilised.

You have got it wrong again - if your knowledge of WW2 comes from books and news reels then research again. News reels were shown some time after the events not in preparation of.

Forgive me if I get this wrong but I wasn't aware that any of the British press actually tells of our "plans" beforehand. And yes, extensive reporting DID go on during WWII - as evidenced by the old newsreels that were shown in cinemas up and down the country.

Jon Snow,Is a stupid man!
I couldnt believe the way he reacted,not the way I would expect an educated man to behave:-((

As I said on another thread our daily paper says it was the yanks but teletext this morning said it was the aussies - whoever did it the editor is completely irresponsible. The lad enlisted to 'do his bit' like all the brave personnel. I have often wondered at the reporting which goes on - we kept stum in WW2 and won it! We did not tell Hitler in advance of our plans.

I would like to see the journalist who shot his mouth off out of his career for life.

Roxanne exactly thats what I meant although I dont agree with it all of the men and women serving have my respect including Prince Harry who could of quite easily got out of going out there.

I agree,Bob.

I think that there is TOO much war zone reporting anyway.......all the enemy have to do is watch the news on TV.........
Bob

Jax,I dont agree with it either,but at least he was willing to do his bit,which makes me respect him,even if Im not a royalist either.