# Army News Updates



## The Anchorman (3 Aug 2005)

To all those interested, we had a busy summer in Army News. We have successfully hooked up Valcartier, Montreal, Gagetown, Petawawa, and Edmonton to the Army News Channel Via Multicast. We are planning to add all the Reserve HQ's this fall, and seven other Regular Force Bases to be determined. For those soldiers on these bases, keep an eye out for a TV in your common area or mess hall, gym, canex, canteen, or other areas like the dental office, hospitals ect... that will be playing Army News. You can also access our stories thru the internet under the army website under the news icon, and browse video stories. You will only get individual stories here, and not the whole newscast.
Also, for everyone not in these areas, you will be soon able to access this on the intranet as well in the next month or so. We are also working on expanding to Canadian Forces TV in the future, and are welcome to comments. I will field any questions you may have, and will check this post often.

Your now up to date, and with that your good to go, for Army News I'm........... Have a good one


----------



## Gunner98 (3 Aug 2005)

Those TVs will last a long time because very few of them are actually turned on.


----------



## GDawg (3 Aug 2005)

Don't forget to add HMCS Tecumseh/ 746 Comm Sqn to the list,
I can show that to indoctrinate potential recruits  >


----------



## Armymedic (3 Aug 2005)

Gunner98 said:
			
		

> Those TVs will last a long time because very few of them are actually turned on.



That must because there is nobody in the building...cause where the troops are there, they definately are not too busy to watch the news.


----------



## Gunner98 (3 Aug 2005)

Actually, the tvs are in the coolest room in the building but the tv volume disturbs all of the card games and war stories.

ArmyMedic have you hit home soil?


----------



## The Anchorman (4 Aug 2005)

Gunner98 said:
			
		

> Those TVs will last a long time because very few of them are actually turned on.


That is ashame. A lot of money(millions) and resources went into a TV network for the troops, and if they are turning it off, they obviously are not intelligent enough to appreciate the hard work and individual efforts put toward their own welfare. This is a very informative newscast that affects our troops, and it is up to all soldiers to tune in and find out what is happening to their army. 
Most of these TV's were placed in areas where someone thought they would be usefull, but if a specific set is wrongly placed and not being used, please tell me the location of the sets, and I will make arrangements to place them in one of the other 1450(or so) buildings across Canada that are not plugged in yet. Thanks for your comments and I would appreciate any further info you could provide me with the above problem.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (4 Aug 2005)

The Anchorman said:
			
		

> That is ashame. A lot of money(millions) and resources went into a TV network for the troops, and if they are turning it off, they obviously are not intelligent enough to appreciate the hard work and individual efforts put toward their own welfare. This is a very informative newscast that affects our troops, and it is up to all soldiers to tune in and find out what is happening to their army.



So what kind of survey or market study was done? Were the troops even consulted as to what they wanted to see, or be informed about? What was the cross section and amount of people consulted? Saying their not intelligent enough to tune in to something that seems to have been put together, behind closed doors, by a few individuals with pocket protectors and $10.00 pens isn't the way to endear yourself to your perspective audience. It starting to sound like nothing more than some puprle trades' idea of a military CBC.

The idea has merit. Your Public Relations don't.


----------



## the 48th regulator (4 Aug 2005)

> they obviously are not intelligent enough to appreciate the hard work and individual efforts put toward their own welfare



Very nice comment. . . 

Hope you are personally helping to educate those heathens.

dileas

tess


----------



## Gunner98 (4 Aug 2005)

Army Bases have Lodger units who are CSS in nature, just because soldiers wear CADPAT does not mean that their interests and attention during every workday downtime moment is focused on the latest Army News.  Perhaps if you surveyed the units or unit PAffO's I think you might find a lot of tv sets that are underutilized.  That's your line of work not mine - the TV networks use Neilson-type rating perhaps you guys have better find out if anyone is watching. I don't recall hearing the average soldier begging for Army News.  If the Unit Info/PAffO are failing you then that too is your responsibility to know not mine. 

I would suggest it is not wise to question anyone's (especially soldiers') intelligence in such a public forum based on their viewing habits during lunch and coffee breaks. If am making you feel that you aren't appreciated maybe you will be reminded of how a lot CSS-support trades/units feel most days on Army bases.

This would not be the first effort by someone in the CF/Army to miss the target on getting soldiers' attention and wasting millions.  Let's remember garrison dress and permeable rain gear as a few examples.


----------



## GO!!! (4 Aug 2005)

Anchorman,

Here's another thought that just flashed in my otherwise numbed brain - you said millions - MILLIONS???

Of all the things we need - ammo, uniforms, diesel, airplanes, submarines etc, and you and your ilk decide to put limited CF funding towards an army TV station. What a breathtaking waste. 

Who asked for a propaganda station? ANYONE? I doubt it. 

Repeat after me - MY JOB SECURITY IS NOT AN OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENT.

Now choke yourself - on screen, so the two guys in Alert and the three in Eureka can watch. 

Not with my hand!!!


----------



## mover1 (5 Aug 2005)

OHHH I sure do hope ARMYNEWS has some really good feel nice stories like they print in the Maple Leaf.
I can't wait to se a story about a Female officer who is going to have "the change" who was given time off to persue running in her last marathon as a woman.
Or how some of the the ladies hockey team did in the finals in borden. AND VOLLEYBALL SCORES WOW 
Or how an RMC student ran through an obstacle course and said it was challenging. 

Thats great news. boy oh boy. 
I hope the TV is placed by those canex fashons. The ones that have army written on them in two languages that look really crappy. Or with A big maple leaf on it with a Harrier Jump jet or and F-16 that say Canada on them. Those fashons ROCK.

Good thing we have enough money for this and not enough to go on TD. I would rather be at Canex watching crap on the TV rather than out training in new and exciting environments.
Thank you anchorman. I have mould in my walls at work. mice eat us out of house and home. The lighting is bad and I don't have the basics like proper washrooms in this building. But your T.V. set will make it better.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (5 Aug 2005)

The Anchorman,

Hope your getting this. It's what you asked for. What your getting is from the grass roots. This is your audience. If you can't, truthfully, answer their questions, I'd say your initiative is already dead in the water. Either let us know the scoop, or close down the transmission tower so we can buy another ship, plane, tank, ammo, whatever. Something that will ensure the survival of one more of us in a combat zone, as opposed to the employment survival of another journalist.

Sorry, I had to edit this. How are you going to reach all the Reservists out there? They are an increaseinly large part of the Forces tactical deployment plan, yet there's no way of reaching them, with your initiative. Oh yeah, it's on the web. Check the hits on the Forces web forum as oppose to this one. Where is your audience? I don't think you guys did a very good market reseach analysis before you launched. More Gov't $ wasted? Get a grip.


----------



## The Anchorman (5 Aug 2005)

recceguy said:
			
		

> So what kind of survey or market study was done? Were the troops even consulted as to what they wanted to see, or be informed about? What was the cross section and amount of people consulted? Saying their not intelligent enough to tune in to something that seems to have been put together, behind closed doors, by a few individuals with pocket protectors and $10.00 pens isn't the way to endear yourself to your perspective audience. It starting to sound like nothing more than some puprle trades' idea of a military CBC.
> 
> The idea has merit. Your Public Relations don't.



Very valid questions. First off, a company was hired in 2002-2003 to conduct an independany study of this before anything was actioned. I cannot oficially quote how many were involved in this study, but the mandate given was more than 2000 soldiers were required to be asked for this research. This programming is for all Army soldiers in the chain of command. It is a means for everyone to provide input to the programming and we ask for feedback on every news show we put on the air. Your comment about planning bhind closed doors could not be further from the truth. The entire senior chain of command helped put it together, and it was passed thru Army council in 2003 and this information was passed down to every commanding officer to relay to the soldiers at the Unit level. This was an army initiative, not a purple idea of anything. Anorated by saying something d finally I have to apologize of the wording I used in the initial reply regarding the tv turned off. Saying our soldiers are not intelligent is a bad choice of words, and I should have said something different like maybe- It is ashame that these TV's are off, and the troops are not recieving some very helpful information in regards to Army transformation, welfare, budget issues, and other things happening in todays army that they would find benificial to their career. Thank you for the comments, and if you have other useful comments, feel free to send them.


----------



## The Anchorman (5 Aug 2005)

Gunner98 said:
			
		

> Army Bases have Lodger units who are CSS in nature, just because soldiers wear CADPAT does not mean that their interests and attention during every workday downtime moment is focused on the latest Army News.   Perhaps if you surveyed the units or unit PAffO's I think you might find a lot of tv sets that are underutilized.   That's your line of work not mine - the TV networks use Neilson-type rating perhaps you guys have better find out if anyone is watching. I don't recall hearing the average soldier begging for Army News.   If the Unit Info/PAffO are failing you then that too is your responsibility to know not mine.
> 
> I would suggest it is not wise to question anyone's (especially soldiers') intelligence in such a public forum based on their viewing habits during lunch and coffee breaks. If am making you feel that you aren't appreciated maybe you will be reminded of how a lot CSS-support trades/units feel most days on Army bases.
> 
> This would not be the first effort by someone in the CF/Army to miss the target on getting soldiers' attention and wasting millions.   Let's remember garrison dress and permeable rain gear as a few examples.



Good comments. First I would like to say that our programming is looped on a weekly schedule, and any soldier can watch it during any day of the week and see the same show. Not asking troops to watch everyday, but if they could find 20 minutes during the week to catch the show, it would be very informative to them. Also, we will not conduct a survey until late this year, as most TV's were only hooked up recently. But we will relocate any sets that are not being used at that time.
In the previous reply I wrote on this fourm, I did mention that I should not have said that Intelligence comment, and I apologize for that.
I do not want to be appreciated for any efforts I put towards this program. I enjoy this job, and I get paid, appreciation is not required for something that takes dozens of people to conduct. My nly satisfaction is knowing someone is watching and sends comments on what to improve on, or what story to get.
This project is new to the military, and with that, risks have to be taken in order to achieve success. We all know that the miltary has made mistakes in the past, but I hope this is not one of them. Thanks for the comments.


----------



## The Anchorman (5 Aug 2005)

GO!!! said:
			
		

> Anchorman,
> 
> Here's another thought that just flashed in my otherwise numbed brain - you said millions - MILLIONS???
> 
> ...


Well aside from having a hard time answering comments like yours when very little thought went into them, and the fact that you are not aware of the power of television, I will still take a moment to fill you in on something that may help educate you a little. First off, I didn't think this was an open forum for comments like you posted at the end of your post. Although choking yourself would be funny, it was directed in a very profane manner towards me, and I do not apreciate it. If you want to make fun of me, I am sure we can make arrangements to meet personally, and joke around.
The next loose comment you made regarding funding is very generic and sounds like a general complaint from someone whom thinks we are still an army that requires more ammo, and uniforms. The simple fact is, that we do have an overall lack of funding for our military, and the reason for this is very political. If this TV propaganda (as you called it) is effective, we will only see increases in funding in the future generated by our news programming.
This TV News concept has already started paying for itself already, we have taken on large projects in recruiting, military funerals, and public affairs products and with those alone we did not have to pay other civilian TV Companies the big dollors to come in as in years past. And in a long term plan, will also save millions of dollars that can be applied towards more equipment as you mentioned above. I hope this helps you in your reasoning process, an as I mentioned earlier, try torefrain for the negative comments towards myself. Thanks for posting.


----------



## The Anchorman (5 Aug 2005)

mover1 said:
			
		

> OHHH I sure do hope ARMYNEWS has some really good feel nice stories like they print in the Maple Leaf.
> I can't wait to se a story about a Female officer who is going to have "the change" who was given time off to persue running in her last marathon as a woman.
> Or how some of the the ladies hockey team did in the finals in borden. AND VOLLEYBALL SCORES WOW
> Or how an RMC student ran through an obstacle course and said it was challenging.
> ...


I totally support all of your comments regarding the Maple Leaf newspaper. Civilians run it, edit it, and feed it, I shouldnt have to explain why that is. I think it is a bad politicial paper, and it is a waste of time, bravo on the honest feedback.
I am sorry to hear the you think the TD budget in your Unit is insufficient, and that you think Army News contributed to it's demise, but the fact is, things are crappy all over, and the political tightwads in the house of commons, and the leaders of this great country failed us to often.
Maybe you should be at the Canex watching our show and not in the field, maybe then you would learn what is changing in the military, and how these changes affect you personally.
If your work enviornment is what you say it is, please tell us where you are and what building you work in, and I will do everything possible to relay this message to General Hillier to see if something can be done about it. No soldier should work in those conditions on a regular basis, and if you send me the info, someone here will expose the potential problems and help improve the situation for you and your troops. That I promise.
Thanks for the post, and sarcasm, and hope to hear from you soon.


----------



## mdh (5 Aug 2005)

Anchorman,

This is encouraging news and I applaud the move toward the eventual creation of a CF network.  Will there be additional information for UIOs/PAFFOs at reserve units?

Cheers
mdh


----------



## The Anchorman (5 Aug 2005)

recceguy said:
			
		

> The Anchorman,
> 
> Hope your getting this. It's what you asked for. What your getting is from the grass roots. This is your audience. If you can't, truthfully, answer their questions, I'd say your initiative is already dead in the water. Either let us know the scoop, or close down the transmission tower so we can buy another ship, plane, tank, ammo, whatever. Something that will ensure the survival of one more of us in a combat zone, as opposed to the employment survival of another journalist.
> 
> Sorry, I had to edit this. How are you going to reach all the Reservists out there? They are an increaseinly large part of the Forces tactical deployment plan, yet there's no way of reaching them, with your initiative. Oh yeah, it's on the web. Check the hits on the Forces web forum as oppose to this one. Where is your audience? I don't think you guys did a very good market reseach analysis before you launched. More Gov't $ wasted? Get a grip.


I inded do love it. Any comments good or bad are worth posting and answering, if it helps the Army. I will try to answer all questions as best as I can, and I will welcome phone discussions from those whom need the more lengthy answers. I type slow, so I will keep these answers short. 
As for your question regarding reservists, we will be hooking them up this fall. We are currently sending the show out to them via DVD or VHS, and will continue to do this until they get hooked up. We are also putting our stories on the internet so they can see them from home if they wish. If any Unit requires more copies of the show, the can call any Public Affairs office to order more. This is an interim soloution. Eventually we will be launching Canadian Forces Television, and this will include a satellite channel. This is another option for them to watch the show from home.
As for the web comments, although the discussion forum is weak, we are consistantly getting over 600,000 hits on the website itself every month. I think that is a pretty high number, and although I don't want to compare it to this site, I think thet are holding their own. I am using this forum as a means of converging this excellnt site coupled with the army one, to reach more soldiers to achieve my aims.
I don't support your coment that it was wasted money, but that is your opinion. And trust me, I have a grip. Thanks for your interest and comments. If you have more, please send them and I will do my best to answer them. Have a good one.


----------



## The Anchorman (5 Aug 2005)

mdh said:
			
		

> Anchorman,
> 
> This is encouraging news and I applaud the move toward the eventual creation of a CF network.   Will there be additional information for UIOs/PAFFOs at reserve units?
> 
> ...


We have passed the updates to all the regular force PAFFO's and UIO's present in the last year, but we never had the opportunity to do this intimately with the reserves. We did hold some information sessions at the reserve Bde levels, and some were there, and we also attended the last 2 major public affairs conferences and made presentations as well. I was also involved last year in presenting updates to all of the Ontairo Reserve Public affairs staff in Toronto.
As for future information, all Public Affairs Officers will be updated thru their Regular Force officers in their Areas. They will also be notified by someone in NDHQ in the upcomming months via email of the latest and greatest, and will have the opportunity to ask questions to our senior staff this fall. I hope this helps.
As for UIO's, we have always had problems relaying information to them due to the fact that many are untrained, and most change so frequently, we decided to go thru the local Public Affairs Offices to help relay to the Units.
Keep the questions comming, and thanks for the interest.


----------



## Roy Harding (5 Aug 2005)

The Anchorman said:
			
		

> ...
> If your work enviornment is what you say it is, please tell us where you are and what building you work in, and I will do everything possible to relay this message to General Hillier to see if something can be done about it. No soldier should work in those conditions on a regular basis, and if you send me the info, someone here will expose the potential problems and help improve the situation for you and your troops. That I promise.
> ...



Are you the Anchorman, or the Ombudsman??


----------



## The Anchorman (5 Aug 2005)

Retired CC said:
			
		

> Are you the Anchorman, or the Ombudsman??


I am the Anchorman, but I can't stand when things need to be rectified and people do not or cannot take the appropriate actions to remedy the situation. Sure...I complain like the next guy, but I also move ahead and attempt to fix anything I feel needs to be fixed if possible.  (Maybe that is why my motorcycle is in the garage in 60 pieces)
I am finally in a position that some of my comments and concerns are relayed directly to the top, and I will use this avenue whenever I feel it may be appropriate to do so.
All for the better of our troops, cause there is only one thing truly important in today's Army, and that is our soldiers!!!!


----------



## Bartok5 (5 Aug 2005)

Anchorman,

I think that I know who you are, based on your organization's recent visit to Gagetown.  If I am correct, then I am assured that you are "one of us" doing the best that you can to spread our message in a positive yet realistic manner.  If I am wrong, then so be it.

The "Public Affairs" business is a losing proposition in the eyes of the operational component of the CF as a whole, and within the Army in particular.  Serving soldiers have been so repeatedly disappointed by "Public Affairs" that we no longer hold any faith whatsoever in your organization's ability to accurately represent our interests - let alone portray what it is that we do for the benefit of Canada.  Your organization broke faith a long time ago by remaining silent in the face of a public media savaging over the Somalia affair.  DND PAff is not the least bit proactive.  To the contrary, your organization is entirely reactive.  And even when faced with media enquiries, the DND PAff "machine" appears to be incapable of anything more than self-serving platitudes and excuses.  I regret to say that as a result of repeated betrayals (or simply negligence) your organization is perceived by the rank and file as being little more than a "mouth-piece" for senior management-directed "sound-bites".

Quite frankly, those of us in uniform have endured more than enough "fluff" and "feel-good" stories spouting the gospel according to senior management.  If you are who I think you are, then you know EXACTLY what I'm talking about.  If your organization truly seeks credibility amongst serving soldiers and wishes to honestly represent what it is that we are collectively doing, then you will stop with the "pap" and report what you see while soldiering alongside troops who are doing the operational or training business.  Stop with the bull-crap "feel-good" stories about "Army Transformation", and start reporting from the pointy-end where the troops are engaged.  That's where most of us are eventually headed (again), and that is what we truly care about.  Don't bother bull-shiting me about the latest field trials for some arcane piece of kit that won't see the light of day for at least 15 years.  I could honestly care less.  After all, where's my new ruck-sack?  

These are well-intentioned words of advice, coming from a fellow who strongly suspects that we know one another and were recently re-aquainted in Gagetown.  If I'm wrong, then such is life.  Whoever you are, you still ought to hoist aboard some advice from the coal-face.  If I'm right, then you know what you need to do to sort your organization out.  Enough of the fluff and political correctness.  Until you start truly reporting from the front, you guys will be nothing more than a video version of the much-despised "Maple Leaf" propaganda rag.  And that's the unfortunate truth.

For what it's worth.


----------



## Gunner98 (5 Aug 2005)

Anchorman, I appreciate your candid feedback and the fact you are taking the time to respond to the posts in this thread.   Telling people to "whistle blow" about units and informing them you have friends in high places such as LCol X and the CDS will not incite confidence in the soldiers to provide honest, thoughtful feedback.

If in your first 15 posts you have become offended by feedback from your Army News Target audience you must understand that in post 6 of this thread you questioned the intelligence of soldiers (your audience).   Your posts have the potential to be informative, concerning items such as the 20-minute loop or the grassroots of Army News, etc.   

We all know you and your peers have been given a difficult job and received some training.   I personally have been a columnist and copy editor for a Base Newspaper. IMO, I don't think you will set an appropriate tone for good interactive dialogue, by exposing a hard line and making big promises (in your first 15 posts) to an audience who have posted 100s or 1000s times to the various threads on this site.   

Anonymous forums like this one permit members that include veterans, soldiers, former soldiers, cadets and civilians to offer advice, to discuss doctrine, to rant and to brainstorm. If you want to become an investigative reporter or a stool pigeon and report what you read hear as fact to your superiors you jeopardize the reasons that people visit here or more likely you diminish your own credibility and the cause/organization that you represent. 

I suggest you sit back a little and sort through the info before you respond.   There is a potential readership of more than 7000 people (10,000 or so years in uniforms) in this forum.   Members of the forum come and go, but many have been around quite a while and do a pretty good job through the DS and Mod functions to police the content.   You have a great opportunity, don't let it be a short-lived one and force people to change the channel or scream for Gene-Gene-the Dancing Machine to â Å“gong you".


----------



## Roy Harding (6 Aug 2005)

Anchorman,

Like Mark C, I do believe I know you.  I would have been the one approving your crazy claims when you were starting this venture.  (As I recall, no one had a Fin Code, but you REALLY NEEDED TO GET TO OTTAWA RIGHT AWAY).  We got you there.

If you are who I think you are, perhaps you could fill in your profile - your background could gain you great credibility here - on the other hand, if you're NOT who I think you are, then your completed profile may land you in hot water here.

It's your move.


----------



## The Anchorman (6 Aug 2005)

Mark C said:
			
		

> Anchorman
> 
> Quite frankly, those of us in uniform have endured more than enough "fluff" and "feel-good" stories spouting the gospel according to senior management.   If you are who I think you are, then you know EXACTLY what I'm talking about.   If your organization truly seeks credibility amongst serving soldiers and wishes to honestly represent what it is that we are collectively doing, then you will stop with the "pap" and report what you see while soldiering alongside troops who are doing the operational or training business.   Stop with the bull-crap "feel-good" stories about "Army Transformation", and start reporting from the pointy-end where the troops are engaged.   That's where most of us are eventually headed (again), and that is what we truly care about.   Don't bother bull-shiting me about the latest field trials for some arcane piece of kit that won't see the light of day for at least 15 years.   I could honestly care less.   After all, where's my new ruck-sack?
> 
> ...


Well put. I will summarize this post by saying that your 99 % on target with this analysis. The Public Affairs Trade has indeed dropped the ball in the last 20 years, and from what I have seen, it doesn't look like a good future at the moment. The only hope we have of making this work, is to rely on the NCM's brought in from the various Combat Arms Trades to sort it out. It is an uphill battle when it comes to our programming, and yes...we are towing the corporate crap to get us started. But we will be straying outside the box on important issues when they arise.
Army Council has approved this project based on informing the Army about transformation, and by a means to help soldiers change their culture to meet their mandate, however we all know no soldiers wants to watch fluffy crap about how good we are, but I think they do want to know where we are going and what affects them in the big picture. So, we are left with being stuck in the middle. Our aim as an organization is to start including the important pressing isues that matter most from the field this fall, but to do it we need to know what they are, and that is where the feedback is required.
This news show will not emulate the Maple News paper(where it started to go in the last 4-6 months) and more importantly, it will also not be a tool to discredit the system either. As a soldier comming from the trenches, I know that the more information I got the more I wanted. But we are funded by the Army Senior staff, and they will only allow us to stray so far. My comrades and I are working hard to change this, and it looks like they are bending to meet the soldiers needs. If all goes well, you will see this alter into a great source of honest usefull information that the troops will want to see. If not, and it turns into the Maple Leaf crap, I am outa here, and back to the trenches. If people like you have great stories to meet this mandate, please email me here and I will go for them, and see how the machine reacts. Thanks for the valuable post, and although I was not on the Gagetown Launch, I am a Combat Arms Sgt doing my best to get er done. Hope to hear back soon.


----------



## The Anchorman (6 Aug 2005)

Gunner98 said:
			
		

> Anchorman, I appreciate your candid feedback and the fact you are taking the time to respond to the posts in this thread.   Telling people to "whistle blow" about units and informing them you have friends in high places such as LCol X and the CDS will not incite confidence in the soldiers to provide honest, thoughtful feedback.
> 
> If in your first 15 posts you have become offended by feedback from your Army News Target audience you must understand that in post 6 of this thread you questioned the intelligence of soldiers (your audience).   Your posts have the potential to be informative, concerning items such as the 20-minute loop or the grassroots of Army News, etc.
> 
> ...


Well put. To start, I was not trying to show off or gain confidence purposely, I came off like that because I think I may be a little weaker on the writing side I guess. I agree with you that troops will not be won over in this manner, and I will try to improve y reply methods in the future.
Secondly, I did get offended by a few posts when they discredit myself and I don't believe anyone wants to be made fun of. I am like 1000's of other soldiers out there just doing their best to get it done in this crazy army of ours. I thought it would be a good idea to post some information here to help inform our troops of what is bing offered to them, and to recieve feedback that I could use to improve the system. I am not treating any of this a factual, only when these soldiers email me at my work address, then it becomes a factual discussion. But it does give me a good flavour and some ideas of what the troops are thinking, and that alone is worth these posts.
Lastly, no big promises will be made. We will do the best we can to meet our soldiers needs, and that everyone should know that all of us came from the field at one point, and we feel the system like they do. I will make a concerned effort to be more informative here, and less preaching, and will strive to answer these posts as best as I can. Thanks for the pointers and keep them comming.


----------



## The Anchorman (6 Aug 2005)

Retired CC said:
			
		

> Anchorman,
> 
> Like Mark C, I do believe I know you.   I would have been the one approving your crazy claims when you were starting this venture.   (As I recall, no one had a Fin Code, but you REALLY NEEDED TO GET TO OTTAWA RIGHT AWAY).   We got you there.
> 
> ...


I don't believe I crossed paths with you before and I think you may be thinking of our PPCLI anchor. I am not him. I will review my profile and include a few more things in there to improve my creditibility, but I was trying to leave me out of the equation, and only use my position here to remain anonomous. I dont think additional information will land me in any hot water, unless you know something I don't yet, lol. Thanks for the info and I will add some stuff to my profile.


----------



## Roy Harding (6 Aug 2005)

The Anchorman said:
			
		

> I don't believe I crossed paths with you before and I think you may be thinking of our PPCLI anchor. I am not him. I will review my profile and include a few more things in there to improve my credibility, but I was trying to leave me out of the equation, and only use my position here to remain anonomous. I dont think additional information will land me in any hot water, unless you know something I don't yet, lol. Thanks for the info and I will add some stuff to my profile.



Yup, it's your PPCLI compatriot I was thinking of.

About your profile - many of us use these to gauge our audience when replying, as well as gauging how much "weight" to give an expressed opinion.  At the moment, yours states that your MOC is 541, and you have 18 years of military experience - period.  I strongly suspect you have a Cbt Arms background, and a tour or two or three under your belt.  A quick "resume" helps in establishing your credibility.  I am well aware that you could post anything you want in there - but these types of self-aggrandizers are usually quickly outed, and their credibility destroyed post haste.

I can understand the_ intention_ of your organization, and your obvious enthusiasm for your chosen role in it.  It's great to see a BTDT enthusiastic about the military, and attempting to correct those issues which continue to plague our serving soldiers, airmen, and sailors.  However - as my Grampa used to say "good intentions pave the road to hell" - given your (assumed, so far) background, I think you'll understand the scepticism with which you were met when you boldly marched onto the public stage and announced "I'm from Ottawa and I'm here to help you".  Think back to the (grunt? zipperhead? thumperhead? 30 mile sniper?  bird gunner?) you were five short years ago, and how YOU would have greeted such an announcement back then.

Good luck to you - your_ intentions_ are, I think, honourable.  Your _actions_ and the _results_ they produce will be the proof of the pudding - eventually.


Retired CC


----------



## The Anchorman (6 Aug 2005)

Retired CC said:
			
		

> Yup, it's your PPCLI compatriot I was thinking of.
> 
> About your profile - many of us use these to gauge our audience when replying, as well as gauging how much "weight" to give an expressed opinion.   At the moment, yours states that your MOC is 541, and you have 18 years of military experience - period.   I strongly suspect you have a Cbt Arms background, and a tour or two or three under your belt.   A quick "resume" helps in establishing your credibility.   I am well aware that you could post anything you want in there - but these types of self-aggrandizers are usually quickly outed, and their credibility destroyed post haste.
> 
> ...


I agree fully. I put a litle more information in my profile, but I don't want to give away all of my secrets, lol. I am on your side, and 2 years ago, I would be the one posting the same replies to the smart ass in Ottawa. I will re-think my answers, and be a little less compassionate when it comes to my comments. Some intentions do pave the road to heck, and your Grampa is a smart guy. Wish he was here to help me with these posts 
Thanks for the help. And I will continue until Gunner98 boots me out of here, lol.
As for my PPCLI partner in crime, he is rocking the boat at work, and is an assett in our mission to turn things around, I am the sweet talker, he is definately the tough guy. Hopefully between us, we will get this mess cleaned up!!!!


----------



## Gunner98 (6 Aug 2005)

Anchorman,

Let me return the complement - your last few posts are well thought out, IMHO, I feel your credibility growing because of your perseverance and honest replies. 

You have walked into a crowded forum, a webplace I like to think of as an Anonymous Brotherhood and yes, there are a few smart Sisters in the 'hood, too.   The weak, the profane and the vile tend to disappear if they can't play by the rules or get claustrophobia.   I, Gunner98, am kind of new at this, too.   I have no power, I am not a Mod or a DS and as newbies, you and I get to test the waters, explore the length of the rope (that may eventually hang us) and correspond with a lot of different and some interesting people. 

I learn more about the CF I have served in for more than 20 years, every time I open Army.ca web page, it's like a Pandora's Box.   Beware, don't let me or the rest of the crowd push you around, but if you step on toes or mix words you might wake up the sleeping dogs - it might be a nice little doggy or big mean one (swinging a baton or a whip) that chases you trying to bite your soft tender hind cheeks.   We both have the same challenging task - that is to learn who are the pack's Alpha dogs.

By the way, one of your fellow Army News Guys came from my unit (he is an MSE Op).   I wish you well in this challenging venture.   Welcome to the crowded room, it can be a scary place.


----------



## Edward Campbell (6 Aug 2005)

At the risk of being repetitious (which has never bothered me before): The long standing problem with public affairs â â€œ which I think goes back more than 20 years â â€œ can be solved only through a complete overhaul.  We (being the country) need (at least)* three separate and distinct groups:

1.	The MND needs a _communications_ staff who try to 'spin' everything to make him look good or smart.  He is selling a 'product:' himself and his government;

2.	The DM needs a _public affairs_ team to explain what the entire Department 'thinks' and does to all Canadians, including other branches of government, and including, also, the people (civilian and military) in DND.  The DM, rather like the MND is 'selling' a product â â€œ national defence; and

3.	The CDS needs a _public information_ staff to tell Canadians, including members of the CF, about the CF.  He, too, is 'selling' a product â â€œ the military.

The three products are separate and distinct and each should be 'sold' by a separate, specialist staff working from broad, general _corporate_ guidelines â â€œ rather in the way that _Wendy's International Inc_ has several quite independent PR staffs â â€œ one to 'sell' the corporation and to _guide_ the others and a separate one to 'sell' _Wendy's_ and another to 'sell' _Tim Hortons_ and still others to 'sell' _Baja Fresh, Pasta Pomodoro_ etc.

The position of ADM Communications is both wasteful (inefficient) and ineffective but change is hard because the Minister's staff is terrified that someone may go _â ?off messageâ ?_ if not tightly controlled.  The end result is that no-one is able to 'sell' their product â â€œ not even the MND, himself.  That, in part, is why the CDS elected to go 'over the heads' of the Department's _communications_ machine and talk directly to soldiers and Canadians â â€œ he knew that the 'filter' would be unable to retain the essence of his _message_ while it massaged the presentation.

Neither the CF or DND are well known, much less understood and _esteemed_ by Canadians.  That's because the DND/CF 'message' doesn't get sold; it gets wrapped up in the larger government 'message' â â€œ diversity, environmentalism, etc, etc, etc, _ ad infinitum_.

DND has a very poor reputation inside government: it is considered to be badly managed, especially re: the apparently perpetual habit of _crying wolf_: saying â Å“the cupboards are bareâ ? and then, when pressed, finding resources for just one more task.  Senior bureaucrats in Finance and the Treasury believe, to this day, that DND still has 'fat' which should be cut before more money is poured in.  That's because the Department, unlike almost all other government departments, does not sell itself to the nation and the rest of the government â â€œ a mistake not made by e.g. Agriculture Canada, Business Development Bank of Canada, Canadian Wheat Board and so on, down through to *W*estern Economic Diversification Canada  That's because the ADM (Communications) operation doesn't _operate_ very well â â€œ it is neither efficient nor effective.

I'm with Gunner98: I learn more here, at army.ca, than I do from all the bumph DND makes available â â€œ broadly (through the press) and narrowly (by direct mailings to _selected_ audiences).
----------

* Arguably the ADM(Mat) needs his own specialized, responsible _public affairs_ team to 'manage' the 'news' about big capital projects and e.g. _Chicoutimi_ style incidents.


----------



## Infanteer (6 Aug 2005)

If you are doing an Army News show, you have to do segements on the Aftermarket Kit world.  Perhaps go through a 5-10 minutes spiel on a few peices of kit from good designers and get some soldiers at the coal face to review it, show advantages/disadvantages, and say how it is better/worse then the current loadout.

Like those Speedvision shows on Cars and 4X4s that highlight products - this is something I'd tune in for.


----------



## mover1 (6 Aug 2005)

Sorry you can't help me with where I work. I work on the blue end of the equation and only 1 Can Air Div can knock this building down and at least give us new digs. Hillier was here last month but he was kept away from the building.  Same with the PM and others. If you are doing the via internet. Please make it baseline acessable. Those people (MSE,  EME, Medical, Engineers etc) Who are at these locations and are eventually heading back to the reality of the ARMY should be kept in the loop.

I would hate to see this endeavour become like the maple leaf. I see empty news paper boxes everywhere. 
Also just for giggle. I wrote a letter to the Maple Leaf during its first issues hoping that it wouldn't turn into another Sentinel. It was published and I was promised it wouldn't. It did. I lost faith in the Public Affairs branch. Who as it was mentioned earlier do to little proactive work.


----------



## Gunner98 (6 Aug 2005)

The wartime Maple Leaf and the Der Kanadier newspaper were different breeds.   The Sentinel during the 80s was good for morale.   It went fluffy then it disappeared because it was "too expensive to produce in a glossy format."   Then we were flooded with DNews2000, Personnel Newsletters, Safety Digests, and Director of Official Languages - expensive, uninformative, civilian-run fluffy crap.   The Air Force Safety Digest used to provide some wonderful true to life articles about accidents, incidents and prevention efforts.   I don't know if it is still around or not I only ever saw it in the last 10 years on the racks by the elevators in NDHQ.

NDHQ and the Army now only publish policy amendments and Routine Orders on-line.   For the average soldier who does not see a computer screen at work or in the field is out of the loop.   To think that a 20-minute national Army news loop will tell him what he needs to know, is short sighted, but a step in the right direction.   The Civilian HR people and the Base learning centres want to provide kiosks where soldiers and civ employees can plug in to upload info.   There are fewer troop/company parades and the Commander's Hour has turned into multi-media, PowerPoint sleepfests.   

The idea of a paperless office and on-line news works only when you are plugged in and don't have to fight with firewalls and DIN access.   That is why Army.ca works - 7000+ people sharing concerns, ideas and advice from the privacy of their own home.   Have you ever tried to send a question to an on-line DND Help site, your question usually is sent back through the chain of command unanswered.


----------



## Devlin (7 Aug 2005)

Anchor Man and others a word to the wise on catching s$!t for what you post here. I was confronted by a member of the CFRC in my town for comments made on this site (I was completely forthcoming in my profile). My comments were not out of line by any streach of the imagination, they were however perceived to be made in a negative light by the person who confronted me (in person at my civilian job). 

This happened a few years back, I spoke to my CO directly about it (we're a small unit) and he said not to worry about it even for a minute. Though for others that interact more directly with the powers that be in Ottawa, comments made here may come back to you. If you wouldn't say it to their face, don't say it here would be my advice. 

I receive the Army News DVD's (being the Unit PAO) and think they are a good product, I try to put them on when time and resources allow( while cleaning weapons on the parade square, unit functions - open houses, recruiting tool to demonstrate that we are an evolving organisation and not the employer of last resort). Could they be better, sure they could but perfect product right out of the gates is rare thing. 

AnchorMan ...I too think I know you and wanted to say thanks for the lift down to EXCON during Stalwart Guardian last year...keep up the good work.


----------



## The Anchorman (7 Aug 2005)

Gunner98 said:
			
		

> Anchorman,
> 
> Let me return the complement - your last few posts are well thought out, IMHO, I feel your credibility growing because of your perseverance and honest replies.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the post. I hope none of the sleeping dogs wake up


----------



## The Anchorman (7 Aug 2005)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> If you are doing an Army News show, you have to do segements on the Aftermarket Kit world.   Perhaps go through a 5-10 minutes spiel on a few peices of kit from good designers and get some soldiers at the coal face to review it, show advantages/disadvantages, and say how it is better/worse then the current loadout.
> 
> Like those Speedvision shows on Cars and 4X4s that highlight products - this is something I'd tune in for.


Do you have any suggestions on where to start, or something in mind? I would be happy to take it on.


----------



## The Anchorman (7 Aug 2005)

mover1 said:
			
		

> Sorry you can't help me with where I work. I work on the blue end of the equation and only 1 Can Air Div can knock this building down and at least give us new digs. Hillier was here last month but he was kept away from the building.   Same with the PM and others. If you are doing the via internet. Please make it baseline acessable. Those people (MSE,   EME, Medical, Engineers etc) Who are at these locations and are eventually heading back to the reality of the ARMY should be kept in the loop.
> 
> I would hate to see this endeavour become like the maple leaf. I see empty news paper boxes everywhere.
> Also just for giggle. I wrote a letter to the Maple Leaf during its first issues hoping that it wouldn't turn into another Sentinel. It was published and I was promised it wouldn't. It did. I lost faith in the Public Affairs branch. Who as it was mentioned earlier do to little proactive work.


We are working on making it baseline accessable, but we are waiting for a new server to do this. Should take about another month to happen. As for your building, try submitting a UCR thru the safety net to demolish that piece of crap bldg your in, it may help. Thanks for the post.


----------



## The Anchorman (7 Aug 2005)

Devlin said:
			
		

> Anchor Man and others a word to the wise on catching s$!t for what you post here. I was confronted by a member of the CFRC in my town for comments made on this site (I was completely forthcoming in my profile). My comments were not out of line by any streach of the imagination, they were however perceived to be made in a negative light by the person who confronted me (in person at my civilian job).
> 
> This happened a few years back, I spoke to my CO directly about it (we're a small unit) and he said not to worry about it even for a minute. Though for others that interact more directly with the powers that be in Ottawa, comments made here may come back to you. If you wouldn't say it to their face, don't say it here would be my advice.
> 
> ...


I agree with you to the letter. I only say things here that I am prepared or have already stated to the organizations and people that I speak of. But you are correct, and I will be a little cautious when speaking openly in here.
No problem for the ride, and stay cool on this years Ex in Petawawa in the upcomming weeks.


----------



## The Anchorman (7 Aug 2005)

Edward Campbell said:
			
		

> At the risk of being repetitious (which has never bothered me before): The long standing problem with public affairs â â€œ which I think goes back more than 20 years â â€œ can be solved only through a complete overhaul.   We (being the country) need (at least)* three separate and distinct groups:
> 
> 1.	The MND needs a _communications_ staff who try to 'spin' everything to make him look good or smart.   He is selling a 'product:' himself and his government;
> 
> ...


This is a very well laid out and thought out description of the past and current states of the PAFF world. They indeed require restructure, and if I could have your permission, I would like to print this out(remove your name if you want me to) and show this to the senior staff in ADMPA and Army Public Affairs next week. I think a letter like this one may start the ball rolling towards some improvement and possible restructure.
No, I do not believe it will stop the press or cause huge changes overnight, but I do feel your summary is exactly what we need to submit to the top brass, and allow them to review and comment on. I thank you for posting this comment, and will await for your reply on if I can use this next week.


----------



## The Anchorman (7 Aug 2005)

Gunner98 said:
			
		

> The wartime Maple Leaf and the Der Kanadier newspaper were different breeds.   The Sentinel during the 80s was good for morale.   It went fluffy then it disappeared because it was "too expensive to produce in a glossy format."   Then we were flooded with DNews2000, Personnel Newsletters, Safety Digests, and Director of Official Languages - expensive, uninformative, civilian-run fluffy crap.   The Air Force Safety Digest used to provide some wonderful true to life articles about accidents, incidents and prevention efforts.   I don't know if it is still around or not I only ever saw it in the last 10 years on the racks by the elevators in NDHQ.
> 
> NDHQ and the Army now only publish policy amendments and Routine Orders on-line.   For the average soldier who does not see a computer screen at work or in the field is out of the loop.   To think that a 20-minute national Army news loop will tell him what he needs to know, is short sighted, but a step in the right direction.   The Civilian HR people and the Base learning centres want to provide kiosks where soldiers and civ employees can plug in to upload info.   There are fewer troop/company parades and the Commander's Hour has turned into multi-media, PowerPoint sleepfests.
> 
> The idea of a paperless office and on-line news works only when you are plugged in and don't have to fight with firewalls and DIN access.   That is why Army.ca works - 7000+ people sharing concerns, ideas and advice from the privacy of their own home.   Have you ever tried to send a question to an on-line DND Help site, your question usually is sent back through the chain of command unanswered.


Well put. Nothing to add from me in this regard except for well done. I hope the Army internet site will be as popular and informative as this one in the future (but I am not holding my breath). Thanks for your post.


----------



## aesop081 (7 Aug 2005)

Gunner98 said:
			
		

> The Air Force Safety Digest used to provide some wonderful true to life articles about accidents, incidents and prevention efforts.   I don't know if it is still around or not I only ever saw it in the last 10 years on the racks by the elevators in NDHQ.



The magazine is called "flight comment" and indeed still exists.  I find it extremly usefull and read it every chance i get.  It is probably the most relevant and engaging publication the CF offers.

I used to love "Sentinel", even had a subscription as a civilian....wish it had never gone away IMHO


----------



## Edward Campbell (7 Aug 2005)

The Anchorman said:
			
		

> This is a very well laid out and thought out description of the past and current states of the PAFF world. They indeed require restructure, and if I could have your permission, I would like to print this out(remove your name if you want me to) and show this to the senior staff in ADMPA and Army Public Affairs next week. I think a letter like this one may start the ball rolling towards some improvement and possible restructure.
> No, I do not believe it will stop the press or cause huge changes overnight, but I do feel your summary is exactly what we need to submit to the top brass, and allow them to review and comment on. I thank you for posting this comment, and will await for your reply on if I can use this next week.



This is the Internet.  You can do whatever you want with whatever you find.  Put in on a roll, perforated every four inches if you like.

This is a public forum â â€œ who cares what name is used?  I may use Edward Campbell as a _nom de plume_ because I don't want to sign on as Ward Elcock or Tom Ring.

Fill yer boots.  Bear in mind that efficiency and effectiveness are highly unpopular on the 13th floor â â€œ it's Image, Image _ueber alles_!


----------



## The Anchorman (7 Aug 2005)

Edward Campbell said:
			
		

> This is the Internet.   You can do whatever you want with whatever you find.   Put in on a roll, perforated every four inches if you like.
> 
> This is a public forum â â€œ who cares what name is used?   I may use Edward Campbell as a _nom de plume_ because I don't want to sign on as Ward Elcock or Tom Ring.
> 
> Fill yer boots.   Bear in mind that efficiency and effectiveness are highly unpopular on the 13th floor â â€œ it's Image, Image _ueber alles_!


Thanks for the comments. I will print er off and submit this week if I can get a quick meeting with the powers to be. I will be taking this first to the 19th floor to senior Army Command thru the head of Public Affairs for review, then if they allow, I will take it down to the basement and give a copy to Mr R*** in ADM PA for review. Thanks.


----------



## GDawg (7 Aug 2005)

And while you're at it, ask 'em for updated ads for the Comm Res in the ADM(PA) ad bank,
and new MOC videos for 215 and 052!


----------



## The Anchorman (7 Aug 2005)

GDawg said:
			
		

> And while you're at it, ask 'em for updated ads for the Comm Res in the ADM(PA) ad bank,
> and new MOC videos for 215 and 052!


Send me the link for the ad bank and I will have a look. Suggestions will be sought after, got any?
Also, new MOC Videos for all trades are underway, but it is costly and time consuming, so it may take a while. Your chain of command can push the recruiting chain from your end to speed up your priority if the original one is far outdated.


----------



## The Anchorman (7 Aug 2005)

GDawg said:
			
		

> And while you're at it, ask 'em for updated ads for the Comm Res in the ADM(PA) ad bank,
> and new MOC videos for 215 and 052!


Send me the link for the ad bank and I will have a look. Suggestions will be sought after, got any?
Also, new MOC Videos for all trades are underway, but it is costly and time consuming, so it may take a while. Your chain of command can push the recruiting chain from your end to speed up your priority if the original one is far outdated. Send me the link. Thanks


----------



## GDawg (7 Aug 2005)

I'll do so whilst at work.
Thanks for asking.


----------



## GDawg (8 Aug 2005)

Here are the links I promised

http://dgpaapp.mil.ca/eng/adbank_browse_e.asp?cat=12

My biggest concern is that some make reference to the LCIS trade, which is not available in the Comm Res
As well, its always nice to use updated photos with CADPAT.


----------



## The Anchorman (8 Aug 2005)

GDawg said:
			
		

> Here are the links I promised
> 
> http://dgpaapp.mil.ca/eng/adbank_browse_e.asp?cat=12
> 
> ...


I cannot access this from home for some reason, I will look it over tomorrow at work and shoot questions to you tomorrow. Thanks.


----------



## Army News (8 Aug 2005)

:warstory:
G-day Anchorman Keep the public informed............ they might soon join the cause.


----------



## the 48th regulator (8 Aug 2005)

Aww frig,

The paparazzi has found us...

dileas

tess


----------



## Army News (8 Aug 2005)

Smile   you just might be on camera.


----------



## aesop081 (8 Aug 2005)

the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> Aww frig,
> 
> The paparazzi has found us...
> 
> ...



You've had your 15 minutes Tess.........


----------



## Blakey (8 Aug 2005)

> they might soon join the cause.


Hopefully soon....


----------

