"Air Cadet Corps"....RAF News Jun 21, 2013

Adult Staff Execs
1

As we all know, the basic required awareness of the current situation and disposition of the broader Royal Air Force is frequently described as having “an RAF News level of understanding”.

Page 13 of the current edition under the headline ‘Golden boy Hoy’s Dambuster tribute’ includes the following statement:

A one-off chance mistake, you’d think. But no. in the two-page spread (pp22/23) for the Queen’s Birthday Honours List, we read:

[quote]Cadet Leader Sqn Ldr Tisley receives the MBE for his work with the Air Cadet Corps…[/quote] (curiously, Sqn Ldr Bernard Tisley is perhaps the only person in the entire newspaper not to have his first name mentioned)

Air Cadet Organisation becomes crossed with Air Training Corps during proof-reading?

Once is a mistake, twice is almost policy by accident.

:mad: :ohmy:

wilf_san

2

You mean we can’t call ourselves the Air Cadet Force anymore? :wink:

3

As the ACO content for the RAF News is written and edited by two VRT officers this is embarrassing, if it were done by your standard journo it would be an understandable mistake.

4

In fairness, neither of these instances of the term “Air Cadet Corps” were on the Air Cadets page.

But conversely, the journalists on the ‘RAF News’ are not by any definition standard journos

They must be experts on defence matters, and, especially, extremely knowledgeable regarding every element of the Air Force. Otherwise, what’s going on at the paper? If they can’t get it right, how will on earth will the Shire Courier ever manage??

wilf_san

5

[quote=“wilf_san” post=8674]In fairness, neither of these instances of the term “Air Cadet Corps” were on the Air Cadets page.

But conversely, the journalists on the ‘RAF News’ are not by any definition standard journos

They must be experts on defence matters, and, especially, extremely knowledgeable regarding every element of the Air Force. Otherwise, what’s going on at the paper? If they can’t get it right, how will on earth will the Shire Courier ever manage??

wilf_san[/quote]

Let’s be honest, Wilf. There very few experts on defence matters anywhere in HM Armed Forces… tongue in cheek smiley face thing

6

I thought we were the RAF Cadets :ohmy:

7

Nearly, also no cigar, don’t forget the ‘Air’…

Clearly, this has been done for ease of recognition by members of the public (and also, you’d expect, in order to assist corporate communications professionals that work outwith our organisation).

Just as has been done already (effectively) for the ‘RAF Reserves’ (publically, as-was pretty much, previously the RAuxAF), to assist in understanding of mission / function.

But within the respective organisations, currently, the original titles remain intact. ATC, RAF(CCF), even the shortform ACO, all still exist…at least presently.

On a related note, the TA is still to be formally re-branded as Army Reserves, as apparently in surveys most people don’t understand the word ‘territorial’.

And tango_lima…when you say…

[quote]Let’s be honest, Wilf. There very few experts on defence matters anywhere in HM Armed Forces… tongue in cheek smiley face thing[/quote]…here’s a quote (directly from the TA and Reserves main website) which is so wrong, it hurts to read it:

…yes, not only factually-incorrect, they can’t even spell the word ‘reserve’ correctly, in an RAF context!!

So it’s not just the editorial staff of the RAF News that need a re-tread…so do the web warriors of the British Army… :frowning:

wilf_san

8

RAF News is the poorest and WORST of all the truth central propaganda rags. Who really cares about what is in it. Honestly some of the white mans problems that appear in this forum do make me laugh :silly:

9

Must…resist… :unsure:

If this really is your opinion, maybe you should make sure your 1RO knows that, during your next SJAR…

No matter how you are choosing to put it, getting the organisation’s name wrong within the in-house paper isn’t trivial. Do you genuinely think it doesn’t matter? Why?

Also, commenting on happenings such as this is exactly what the forum’s intended for…the same as for any dedicated/specialist forum or newsgroup. And isn’t this also the basic reason that you’re still here, as a member??

Granted, all being well, the RAF News will get it right the next time- but it’s a strange fundamental mistake to have made once, let-alone twice.

wilf_san

10

[quote=“wilf_san” post=8745]Must…resist… :unsure:

If this really is your opinion, maybe you should make sure your 1RO knows that, during your next SJAR…

No matter how you are choosing to put it, getting the organisation’s name wrong within the in-house paper isn’t trivial. Do you genuinely think it doesn’t matter? Why?

Also, commenting on happenings such as this is exactly what the forum’s intended for…the same as for any dedicated/specialist forum or newsgroup. And isn’t this also the basic reason that you’re still here, as a member??

Granted, all being well, the RAF News will get it right the next time- but it’s a strange fundamental mistake to have made once, let-alone twice.

wilf_san[/quote]

I have to agree with Wilf here its not hard to get something like this right.

The RAF news isnt that bad its good for a quick flick through in the crew room now and then they have some really good reports.

11

[quote=“wilf_san” post=8745]Must…resist… :unsure:

If this really is your opinion, maybe you should make sure your 1RO knows that, during your next SJAR…
[/quote]

Eh? Why…? It’s being going downhill for years, nobody takes it seriously now. Except maybe the cadets it seems.

12

Should just bin the whole joke of a rag and re-invest the money saved into something useful.

13

Hello,

Thanks for your comments.

VR(T) Officers are not currently in charge of these pages. They began, but the relationship was proving difficult to maintain, so we have withdrawn for the last 2/3 months.

We are hoping to begin again soon.

Furthermore, the Chris Hoy article was sent to the RAF News and they were asked not to change anything, but did. It’s ludicrous for anyone to think we would call ourselves the Air Cadet Corps or anything similar. We are the Air Cadet Organisation or RAF Air Cadets. Editing the paper and problems which occur due to inaccuracies sit with the editor I’m afraid.

14

Ask CAC to write to them. She is in charge of this organisation and it’s her name over the door. A simple apology would cost nothing (and be hardly read by consumers).

15

I’d suggest a round of letters to the editor!

Dear Sir,

I’m disgruntled of 123DF, and am appaled at your rags incapability on a number of occasions to name the ACO/RAF Air Cadets/ ATC/ CCF(RAF) correctly! Instead you use the quite incorrect term of ‘Air Cadet Corps’!

Harrumph!

16

That would be a waste of time, nothing remotely contrary to the party line would be published.

17

Actually, Pravda, sorry, the RAF News does print corrections and complaints on the letters page.

18

Its an easy mistake to make: Think what the really big cadet organization is … that right ACC. They just got the last word wrong… :stuck_out_tongue: