British captives allowed to talk to press by MoD

2007-04-08 11:41:20

#1

Bertster7: Confused Pothead; +1,101|6589|SE London

The MoD have waived the typical ban on talking to the press for the sailors and marines that were abducted by Iran recently. Leading Seaman Faye Turney stands to make around £100000 for her story. It seems fairly clear that this has been done as counter propaganda, showing that their time in Iran was not as comfortable as it appeared on Iranian TV.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6537103.stm

Personally I think this is a good idea. The ex-captives get lots of money out of it (if they want it) and their side of the story gets told accurately. I can't see what the problem is, other than it being in slightly poor taste.

What do you think?

2007-04-08 11:44:42

#2

Lost Hope: Lurker; +20|6335|Brussels, Belgium

No, money from any tragedy is just bad.

https://bf3s.com/sigs/9c9f8f6ff3579a4c711aa54bbb9e928ec0786003.png

2007-04-08 11:46:02

#3

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6413|North Carolina

Free speech FTW... I don't have a problem with it.

2007-04-08 11:48:14

#4

UON: Junglist Massive; +223|6661

But could the waiver be considered a bribe to ensure they play up certain elements of their story in a way favourable to the current aims of the MoD?

2007-04-08 11:48:45

#5

Bertster7: Confused Pothead; +1,101|6589|SE London

Lost Hope wrote:
No, money from any tragedy is just bad.

So what, someone will get money for it. It might as well be the soldiers, otherwise the press will just harrass their friends and family until little bits of partially accurate information filter into the media, and they'll get paid for it. Surely the captured sailors deserve it more than anyone else.

2007-04-08 11:49:16

#6

Lost Hope: Lurker; +20|6335|Brussels, Belgium

Turquoise wrote:
Free speech FTW... I don't have a problem with it.

Even when money is what moves this free speech ?

I fear that the medias will exaggerate things just to get more attention and more sells, just look at the British tabloids, is it free speech ?

2007-04-08 11:50:18

#7

Bertster7: Confused Pothead; +1,101|6589|SE London

UON wrote:
But could the waiver be considered a bribe to ensure they play up certain elements of their story in a way favourable to the current aims of the MoD?

It seems unllikely since some of those concerned have stated that they will offer their fee to charity.

Royal Navy Lt Felix Carman said any fee was likely to go to charity.

"I am not interested in making money out of this," the 26-year-old from Swansea told the BBC.

"My main aim is to tell the story. There's some people who might be making money, but that's an individual's decision, that's very private."

Last edited by Bertster7 (2007-04-08 11:51:00)

2007-04-08 11:51:49

#8

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6413|North Carolina

Lost Hope wrote:
Turquoise wrote:
Free speech FTW... I don't have a problem with it.
Even when money is what moves this free speech ?

I fear that the medias will exaggerate things just to get more attention and more sells, just look at the British tabloids, is it free speech ?

Here's the irony of this... It is technically "free" speech, but it has also been bought. Still, I would echo Bertster's comment: if anyone deserves the money, it's the soldiers.

2007-04-08 11:53:57

#9

Lost Hope: Lurker; +20|6335|Brussels, Belgium

Bertster7 wrote:
Lost Hope wrote:
No, money from any tragedy is just bad.
So what, someone will get money for it. It might as well be the soldiers, otherwise the press will just harrass their friends and family until little bits of partially accurate information filter into the media, and they'll get paid for it. Surely the captured sailors deserve it more than anyone else.

I don't understand the need for full details of the press, they already said that they weren't treated as they stated in the Iranian TV.

2007-04-08 11:57:43

#10

Bertster7: Confused Pothead; +1,101|6589|SE London

Turquoise wrote:
Lost Hope wrote:
Turquoise wrote:
Free speech FTW... I don't have a problem with it.
Even when money is what moves this free speech ?

I fear that the medias will exaggerate things just to get more attention and more sells, just look at the British tabloids, is it free speech ?
Here's the irony of this... It is technically "free" speech, but it has also been bought. Still, I would echo Bertster's comment: if anyone deserves the money, it's the soldiers.

The "free" in free speech has nothing to do with money. It is freedom of speech, not free because it doesn't cost anything.

2007-04-08 12:02:20

#11

UON: Junglist Massive; +223|6661

Bertster7 wrote:
UON wrote:
But could the waiver be considered a bribe to ensure they play up certain elements of their story in a way favourable to the current aims of the MoD?
It seems unllikely since some of those concerned have stated that they will offer their fee to charity.

Royal Navy Lt Felix Carman said any fee was likely to go to charity.

"I am not interested in making money out of this," the 26-year-old from Swansea told the BBC.

"My main aim is to tell the story. There's some people who might be making money, but that's an individual's decision, that's very private."

Well, we'll see if there's any correlation between fee and sensationalism at a later date

2007-04-08 12:03:53

#12

fadedsteve: GOP Sympathizer; +266|6498|Menlo Park, CA

Turquoise wrote:
Free speech FTW... I don't have a problem with it.

He's right! Thats why we fight so hard to preserve it!

As long as nothing they say could jeopardize national security, go ahead! tell and sell your story!

Last edited by fadedsteve (2007-04-08 12:04:43)

2007-04-08 12:05:41

#13

ghettoperson: Member; +1,943|6657

Lost Hope wrote:
No, money from any tragedy is just bad.

What tragedy? They all got home ok, no one died, war has once more been averted. Sounds like a happy ending to me.

2007-04-08 12:09:51

#14

Lost Hope: Lurker; +20|6335|Brussels, Belgium

ghettoperson wrote:
Lost Hope wrote:
No, money from any tragedy is just bad.
What tragedy? They all got home ok, no one died, war has once more been averted. Sounds like a happy ending to me.

It will look like a horrible tragedy in English tabloids, nothing good can come from sensationalist press.

If there was a more selling story, they wouldn't give a shit about the soldiers.

2007-04-08 12:10:49

#15

Bertster7: Confused Pothead; +1,101|6589|SE London

fadedsteve wrote:
Turquoise wrote:
Free speech FTW... I don't have a problem with it.
He's right! Thats why we fight so hard to preserve it!

As long as nothing they say could jeopardize national security, go ahead! tell and sell your story!

I assume it won't, since they've been given the official go ahead.

2007-04-08 12:21:00

#16

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6413|North Carolina

Bertster7 wrote:
Turquoise wrote:
Lost Hope wrote:

Even when money is what moves this free speech ?

I fear that the medias will exaggerate things just to get more attention and more sells, just look at the British tabloids, is it free speech ?
Here's the irony of this... It is technically "free" speech, but it has also been bought. Still, I would echo Bertster's comment: if anyone deserves the money, it's the soldiers.
The "free" in free speech has nothing to do with money. It is freedom of speech, not free because it doesn't cost anything.

True, but it's still an ironic grammatical incident. lol

2007-04-08 12:22:35

#17

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6413|North Carolina

Lost Hope wrote:
If there was a more selling story, they wouldn't give a shit about the soldiers.

True... No one ever said the media was moral....

2007-04-08 14:05:34

#18

GorillaTicTacs: Member; +231|6381|Kyiv, Ukraine

They need to stop being propoganda tools. You would think they would learn when Iran did it to them, then they let their own military re-program them. Its like watching some kind of sad clown wind-up toy, with those kids so confused about what they're supposed to say and what really happened they just have this permanent dopey stare on their face. Not to mention they're Brits, so 2 weeks without a beer is tantamount to torture.

I just have one question though,What Persian dish did that chick find so tasty that she put on freaking 50 lbs. in the course of 2 weeks even while chain-smoking?

I got a Persian restaurant next door, and while the grill meat and kebabs are pretty good, its no hummus there so I generally go Lebanese instead when I have a choice. Question 2...how could Iranians NOT have hummus!?!? Maybe they are evil.

Last edited by GorillaTicTacs (2007-04-08 14:09:31)

Yes	60%	60% - 9
No	40%	40% - 6
Total: 15

BF2S Forums British captives allowed to talk to press by MoD

Poll

Lost Hope wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

UON wrote:

Lost Hope wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

Lost Hope wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Lost Hope wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

UON wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Lost Hope wrote:

ghettoperson wrote:

Lost Hope wrote:

fadedsteve wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Lost Hope wrote:

Lost Hope wrote:

Board footer