Should public service people be allowed to sell their stories?

Judt

The current bru-hah going on in the UK over the 15 captured and released British service personnel selling their stories to the media (some are, some aren't) raises an interesting question - Should service people, be they British soldiers or Irish Gardai, be allowed to sell their stories to the media? I think that this is a good example to work from, and it's a real political decision...

I think it's a catch 22. On the side of selling stories, the story is going to leak out anyways and the red tops are going to spin it for all it's worth, so why not allow the people involved - who aren't exactly on amazing salaries to start with - to profit from it, rather than some family member or random stranger they met in the pub once, who could say what they like for their couple of quid.

On the side of not selling the stories, there is the fact that there is a difference between telling and selling - should service people be allowed to sell their stories and make a mint when, for example in this case, six British soldiers died on the day that the 15 British sailors were released from captivity after surrendering and cooperating with the enemy?

I would err on the side of not allowing them to sell their stories, as it does create major morale and discipline problems throughout the service - in Ireland we already have a perceived problem that our police love to go and tell their media pals everything they know over a few pints, and something like this vindicates such behavior.

On the other hand, I do believe that the stories should be told - just in a managed way in which it isn't profitable to, say, make up crap and sell it to the media if you're in a service.

What would you think?

Scigaithris

This thread could be reframed in a Derridian deconstructionist sense to ask the question, "What does it say about a news media that pays public service people to tell their stories;" e.g., be it a pint in a pub or a fat check to air dirty laundry?

Further, one may ask the subordinate question, to what extent does the news media get what it pays for; i.e., what is "fact" and what is "fiction," and how do you know? Or are certain things paid for, while others are not, and how does this affect truth in journalism?

Sesshoumaru

Those 15 sailors were a major embarassment to their country. I find it appalling that some of them will actually profit from this. A court marshal and lenghty prison sentences would be to good for them.

El Stuntman

I thought they had the concept of a D-Notice in the UK which would be applied in cases where national security was compromised.

was used liberally in the Cold War, anyone know if this has been dropped?

Zambia

Bit like "Im a well trained Marine get me out of here"

They should be allowed sell there stories when they leave as long as it does not contravene the official secrets act.

This is mere typical The SUN, The Star Pap.

Cant say I was impressed at all the stories coming out but would you refuse a few grand for a days work...

Fratton Fred

Sesshoumaru wrote:

Those 15 sailors were a major embarassment to their country. I find it appalling that some of them will actually profit from this. A court marshal and lenghty prison sentences would be to good for them.

Why? it's very difficult to judge sat behind a pc in Ireland.

If I was blndfolded and people were cocking automatic weapons around me, I'd sing like a bird.

That said, sensationalist stories are a lot more appealing to the tabloids.

"I thought I'd be raped" is a much better headline than "They made me a nice cup of tea and we played ping pong".

It's a shame they are selling their story as it belittles the whole sorry event.

sovtek

Of the whole the situation I am of the opinion that this is the biggest non issue!

Gonzo_Reporter

If i were in there shoes or combat boots, i wouldnt sell my story. I would be betraying my friends and so foreth.I would have thought there would have been some sort of order from their officers proventing them from speaknig to the media they are still in the army.
I dont blame the media for following this story as a journalist myself i would only be doing my job, whiether or not you like it the readers of these tabliods obviously want to know what happened or the story whould have been forgotten. I havent read the articles myself so wont coment on them itself. But if there was some breach of protocol that led to the 15 been captured i would have said something. Whistle blowers are essential and can lead to change.

In regards to Scigaithris sub question... The reporters would only be getting the sailors opinions and opinions HAVE to be backed up by facts. Its up to the ethics of the journalist really.
In many ocases people are paid not really for their 'stories' but because they might be afraid of lossing their jobs or income.

Scigaithris

Gonzo_Reporter wrote:

In many ocases people are paid not really for their 'stories' but because they might be afraid of lossing their jobs or income.

Does the news media really pay an amount large enough to compensate someone in public service, should they lose "their jobs or income"? A month income? Several months (cause you don't land a new job immediately)? A year's income?

How is this amount determined? Is it based upon what they are currently earning for a specified period of time, or upon those who have actually lost their jobs in the past as a result of giving their stories to reporters? An average income, or minimum wage, or by pay grade, or what?

Is it negotiated between parties before the story is given? That also means that, in addition to the potential risk of losing one's job for reporting, there is also the potential gain of income should they not lose their job? How could this gain in income influence what is reported? How could this extraordinary compensation influence what stories the news media is willing to pay for, or not pay for?

oscarBravo

Seems better suited over here.