§ 26. Sir William Davisonasked the Secretary of State for War whether in connection with the recently-established Sergeant-Photographer Corps in the Middle East for the supply of newspaper photographs to London and New York, he will consider allowing the names of the photographers, who for the most part do their work in the fighting-line, to appear on the photographs which they transmit?
§ Sir J. GriggAs far as individual publicity is concerned, soldiers equipped with cameras are treated in the same way as the rest of the Army. It is not customary, therefore, publicly to connect the names of officers and men of the Army Film and Photographic Service with photographs taken by them in the normal course of their duty.
§ Sir W. DavisonIs my right hon. Friend aware that these specially trained photographers were given the rank of sergeant 649 in order that they should mix with soldiers in the front line, the only difference being that they are armed with cameras instead of rifles; and as they cannot be identified with any military unit, what service could it be to the enemy if their names were published on the photographs?
§ Sir J. GriggMy answer was not based on the security question but on the very sensible, or very appropriate, rule that all ranks of the Army do their work anonymously.
§ Sir W. DavisonBut was not the rule made so that the enemy should not be able to identify particular units at the front, which does not apply in this case? Is there not far too much concealment of individual gallantry at the front, which could well be made public?
§ Sir J. GriggIf it is a question of mentioning individual gallantry, I think it should be done for the fighting men first. One has only to consider the impossibility of doing that to answer my hon. Friend's question.