Even more interesting than the question during my interview with the Scottish Office than who I would invite to a dinner party was whether I would lie to a journalist. Lies are nearly always found out in the end. So, lying is not a good idea. The question placed me in a dilemma because I knew British Government spokesmen did lie. A guy at the Ministry of Defence had just lied to me about the deaths of nine British soldiers at the hands of the US Air Force during the First Gulf War in 1991. I didn't want to appear naive when answering at the interview. But having never been to a dinner party, I probably wasn't going to get the job anyway.

Well, the folks in charge of the BBC have shown yet again that they're not fit to run a bath. They've just cut off overseas online access to British and Scottish radio news bulletins. So, no more Good Morning Scotland, no more The World at One. I'm not getting up in the middle of the night to listen to them livestreamed. Even if that was possible. Now, you'd have thought in a world of misinformation the BBC would have an interest in providing as much news content as possible. I guess I'll just have to rely on MAGA Conspiracy sources and that nice Elon Musk chappie, the one who believes the British jail system is filled with political prisoners. I don't think letting folk listen to the same news as people back home get costs the BBC extra. Did you know the BBC has a programme that no men are allowed on - The Conversation. The creators boasted no males were allowed at all but I think they ran into problems denying guys jobs on the production team - ie sex discrimination laws relating to employment. That doesn't mean they don't discriminate, just they can't boast about it any longer. Jolly Good Show.

I recently managed to watch the 1916 film of the Battle of the Somme. It was the most viewed film shown in British cinemas at the time and may still hold some kind of a record. Anyway, I was interested to see how one of the biggest disasters in British military history was portrayed to the public back home. Let's just say no outright lies were told but folk might have been left with the impression it was a victory: footage  of captured German positions and long lines of prisoners. One of the things that struck me was that nearly all the prisoners were wearing the soft feldmutze caps and not helmets. Who were these guys? 

Long time passing in a place far far away there was a guy on a journalism course. The course was part of the Printing and Media Department's empire at the college. So when the printing students went on a visit to one of the biggest book printers in Europe, the department head took along the journalism student guy to record his triumphant progress through the plant. The printing plant included a miracle press which had cardboard, paper and ink fed in at one end and kicked out palettes of finished books at the other. Some joker had put a For Sale sign on. It turned out from  talking to print workers that the miracle press chewed up thousands of books when it was started up and a similar number when it was shut off. The tour guide must have been a very bitter employee. He told the students that a far smaller printer had ordered some specialist ink that the big printer suddenly needed. The big guys phoned the supplier and demanded the ink. They pointed out how much their business was worth to the supplier and what they got from the little guy who placed the ink order. They got their ink and maybe the little guy went to the wall because he couldn't fill an order. The day after the class trip the journalism guy was summoned to the department head's office and told if he wrote about anything he'd learned on the class visit he would be kicked out of college. It wasn't clear if it was the miracle press's poor performance or the ink hijacking that was the problem. The department head obviously didn't know much about journalism and the need to double-check information. Getting kicked off the course would probably mean no job. What do you think our hero did? 

I heard something on the radio about a controversial bravery award in Afghanistan. Putting aside the allegations of dishonesty involved, some, if not all, of the blame lies at the door of the battalion of The Rifles involved. In their rush to get a gallantry medal credited to the unit, the officers failed to investigate the claim properly. I doubt if many in the medal winner's platoon applauded the highly dubious award. Sadly, the number gallantry awards credited to a battalion is as good an indication of military value and combat effectiveness as a body count of dead Vietnamese is a guarantee of ultimate victory. I understand in the early days of the SAS the unit subscribed to a more traditional regimental ethos that scorned bravery award applications because very high standards of conduct were par for the course in the unit. I know of at least one Crimean War Victoria Cross winner who was chosen through a vote by his whole battalion. Either approach would have saved The Rifles a great degree of ridicule. I can't be alone in thinking that an out and out popularity contest is just, if not more, likely to produce a deserving recipient than the way things are apparently done at the moment.