h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

It seems like we're in the middle of a spate of scandals. Broadcasters, newspapers, political parties and governments, religions, supermarkets, banks, Rolf Harris... Everyone's getting it in the ear. Now Corrie is under fire.
So, is there anyone we still feel we can trust?

As far as I know, MSF still have a good name, as do many other international aid/development charities.

TRiG.

I don't think it was "getting it in the ear" that got these organisations in trouble.



Or maybe it was.

How about the leading charitable institutions? Municipal governments and their various departments? Are public cemetaries and poola being well maintained by the departments that care for them? Public parks? Road maintenance bodies? Specialized education?

There are people who would consider some development organisations and charities to be somewhat discredited - the various chugger problems for example, and the donkey sanctuary with more money than they could possibly use.

And also how some of those organisations work in Africa. See Paul Theroux's book, for one example.

sprout

Santa Claus, perhaps?

We generally distrust large organisations, but we can still trust the people who run them. An example would be Richard Branson, who's made a career out of appearing to be on our side.

Oh, and for least discredited organisations in the UK it has to be the Army - see the popularity surge of Help the Heroes, Wootton Bassett funerals, etc.

>>It seems like we're in the middle of a spate of scandals<< : Just Bob

Hmm, from here it's beginning to feel like a bandwagon to be jumped on

Well, there's the WI - except for peddling sweetened bread snacks and religion, they're perfect.

I could never get on with the WI. I went to a few meetings of a splinter group of the WI called the Yorkshire Countrywoman's Association. They were much more interesting

As if on cue, a WI scandal.... albeit one for which my only source is a picture of a newspaper article that someone's tweeted.

https://twitter.com/lukelewis/status/329904759962234880/photo/1

If dressing as pirates on the slimmest of pretexts was a source of discredit, why; we wouldn't have any credit left.

The ARMY???

This army? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Baha_Mousa

I'd say... the BBC's Natural History unit, personified by Sir David Attenborough.

And Monty Python.

Wasn't David Attenborough discredited for fakery? They filmed polar bears in Amsterdam Zoo, or something.

As far as I know, Santa Claus has never gotten anything wrong, unless you count not existing.

The Windsor clan have been having a bit of a media love-in for the past couple of years, no? Well, with the possible exception of the Will Carling one.

Princess Kate's baby bump seems to be on the cover of most of the tabloids here in the States. That's fine with me. I wish she would dislodge all the pictures of Kim Kardashian. I could not care less how fat Ms. Kardashian is getting during her pregnancy. The worst part is that ultimately there will be one more Kardashian to receive undeserved media attention.

David Attenborough's team did in fact use some footage from a zoo to make an educational program about animals in the wild. He admitted this and didn't apologise - that's part of film-making. The film achieved its purpose of highlighting the plight of polar bears in the wild.