British Army Review

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Outstanding, Apr 10, 2007.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. As I had afew minutes to spare I cast my eye across this usually tedious publication to discover that its Editorial dislikes ARRSE and BAFF, seeing both as unecceassry and proposing that personnel should write to BAR to air opinions and grievances. Now I may be naive and old fashioned, but boy whover writes for them really needs to wake up and smell the coffee.
    If BAR was the organ it apparently wants to be (and not some boring regurgitation of old battles and or supposedly new and dynamic tactics/ methodologies) then it might be more widely read and better accepted. As it is it remains an intellectual masterpiece enjoyed mostly by its editorial staff, contributors old and retired officers (and those stuck in Generals outer offices!).
  2. It does have nice pictures though
  3. Though I think more could be achieved by giving the men some real toilet paper.
  4. It is really shiny and hard to flush away!
  5. Plus the fact that you only ever seem to come across copies that are at least a year old.
  6. It was tedious when I was serving and its tedious now! The odd good article and the remainder either run of the mill or worse.
  7. I think 'they' fail to understand that should you expose yourself (or possibly your unpopular opinions) in the pages of BAR you may perceive yourself to come under 'their' control. The writer was very sniffy about BAFF; possibly he perceives a shift in control.
  8. Wonder what CGS thinks?

    Did BAR miss the media furore over the fact that his troops stood up and let their support of him be known through these august pages? Did BAR then miss the rapidly snowballing effect as the vociferous support was spread far and wide?

    I know CGS didn't.

    Perhaps BAR should ask themselves just why BAFF and Arrse came to be?

    Or maybe they'd like to pop in and justify their views more lucidly?
  9. Market forces at work here - if BAFF and ARRSE are seen as unecessary by the great majority of us then - they will disappear! Bet they don't though.
  10. OldSnowy

    OldSnowy LE Moderator Book Reviewer

    I raised this in the BAFF Forum when the last BAR came out. On the one hand, the editorial seemed to demand that theirs was the only forum for considering things of deep interest to the Army, yet on the other hand its 'stop press' section referred to an event already six weeks old when the magazine went to press, let alone when it was issued. In the modern world, a biannual magazine just does not cut the mustard as a vehicle for reasoned debate.

    Great book reviews though!
  11. Then maybe they should launch an online edition like Navy News?

    Incidentally, their assistant editor is in RR at the moment seeking opinion and ideas , not busy lambasting "unofficial forums"
  12. Goatman

    Goatman LE Book Reviewer

    I must be one of the few that used to read and enjoy the BAR....but it's publication schedule is the main just isn't agile enough to debate hot issues. That said, it has a niche which it should celebrate and do more with.

    The same can be said of Soldier which is of course monthly - I look forward to reading an Editorial in their May edition on the rights and wrongs of cheque book journalism..... :roll: . ....sad to read here on Arrse that Soldier is not held up as the touchstone of truth that it once was - ( ' well I read it in Soldier - so it must be true ! ') ...... seem to be quite a few here on Arrse who think it now toes the Party line a little too much.

    FWIW, the editor's view of Arrse is that most of the stuff that appears here is ' Like reading lavatory walls ' :lol:

    Anyone for Forces Samizdat ?

    > ' Tommy's Times - Tells It Like It Is ! ' -

    > Page 3 featuring 'Women You Fancy That You Shouldn't '

    > Sports editor ( Sgt) Kelly Holmes MBE

    > Political editor (Major) Patrick Mercer MP

    > Transport correspondent (Cpl, RLC(V) ) The Earl Attlee

    Lee Shaver

    ( B.A Journalism, Mumbai College of Correspondence (failed) )
  13. Proud to say that during 35 years 9 months Service, I never read the BAR, which I have heard described as: ".... the most boring, 'up itself' publication in Britain. Who pays for it ?".

    I'm glad it (BAR) dislikes this web-site.

    I'll wager that, if he had time, CGS would browse this site and clearly he would 'sift the sh*t' faster than the rest of us.

    I'll also wager that the same gentleman would address certain issues raised herein, especially those relating to the most junior members of the Army.

    (I cannot remember the 'name' of the poster - in my opinion a staff officer - who berated me for 'reminding' senior officers that their primary responsibilty is to the private soldiers. No doubt he, or maybe she, will have another swipe).
  14. msr

    msr LE

    I would like to write a piece for BAR, but haven't the time, not the access to source data that would be required (The farce of ROCC(V)).

    Anyway anything remotely critical of the orthodox would have me labelled as a heretic and burned at the stake, or at least smouldered in the Adjt's office.

    If they wanted a better distribution, why not post the whole lot as a correctly formatted pdf (i.e. not two columns) on armynet, or even, gasp, the MOD website?

    But lay off the TA, eh?

    "...submissions written by a current company commander in Iraq could be considered as more relevant ... than one written by a TA major running Benbecula artillery range." p.62

    " the world of training, albeit TA..." p.73

    " least it might keep TA Members of Parliament quiet." p.121

  15. When I started tis thread I was actually upset that BAR were being so critical of both this site and BAFF. Of course in my haste i forgot thatthey are simply bound to angered by "our" temerity to not consider that BAR is the only official organ that can express a view. I know that these pages are not solely contributed to by accredited / genuine individual servicemen and women, however that in itself does not either lessen the value of their comment nor necessarily weaken their arguments. I do agree that BAR has its place, as an academic and very occasioanlly generally interesting publication, however gven its bi-annual publication it will always be at least 6-8 weeks behind the curve. ARSSE thrives on up to the minute debate. For instance would BAR ever discuss the pros and cons of military press freedom - unlikely?!