It's ironic, isn't it? The Sun Newspaper, which for so long has blown the trumpet for the wonderful charity "Help Is For Heroes", has chosen the time around Remembrance Sunday to spit in the face of British servicemen and women, both living and dead by dragging one of the UK's fallen soldiers' memories through the mud.

Jamie Janes of the Grenadier Guards (my Great Grandfather's regiment) was killed shortly after having arrived in Afghanistan. The 20 year old was fatally wounded whilst on foot patrol. Whilst the death of another young soldier in a foreign country never diminishes in its tragedy, it would also appear that the hypocrisy of tabloid journalists has no intention of abating either.

I'd like to make this abundantly clear - I'm certainly no fan of Mr Brown - but for once I take my hat off to him. He took the time to write personally to Mrs Janes to express his condolences for the loss of her son. This was no generic standard letter laser-printed with a facsimile signature at the bottom of it - he hand wrote it. As my colleagues will no doubt agree, his hand-writing is better than mine - and I have the sight of both eyes! And unless you have absolutely perfect handwriting, it will appear on occasion as though words have been misspelled. Not only did Mr Brown write a personal letter to Mrs Janes, but when his errors were pointed out, he did the honourable thing (for a change) and called Mrs Janes to apologise.

But this wasn't enough for that champion of just causes, The Sun. They had to ensure that the conversation was recorded. Am I missing something here? How on earth is this responsible journalism? In fact, how on earth is this responsible human behaviour full stop?

It's impossible for me to imagine the utter gut-wrenching grief that the loss of a son would cause a mother. And it is impossible for me to imagine the anger and frustration that would accompany a mother's grief for the loss of a son who was killed in action in a conflict that very few people can confidently say they know the precise purpose of. So whilst Mrs Janes might have felt at the time that she was acting in the best interests of her son's memory by bringing Mr Brown's poor handwriting to the attention of The Sun, maybe this wasn't actually the case. And this is the nub of the issue - The Sun's complete and utter lack of any form of moral direction.

Any Editor with any sense of decency, morality or compassion would not have gone anywhere near this so-called "story" under the circumstances. It's a cheap shot - cynical and, bearing in mind their sanctimonious stance as far as British servicemen and women are concerned, hypocritical beyond belief. Ok, so Brown got it wrong - but for once Mr Brown was actually trying to do the right thing. The Sun could learn a lesson or two from that - they aren't pursuing this "story" to right an alleged injustice, they're doing it to sell newspapers. And to trade on the lives of fallen soldiers is quite simply repellant.

How is Mrs Janes going to reflect on this situation in a year or two's time? Will she be proud? Will she regret her choice of action once time has begun to heal her pain?

Will her son be remembered for what he was - "a soldier to his heart" as he has been described? Or will he simply be remembered as a tabloid splash? For the sake of the thousands of British servicemen and women who have given their lives (for their country - not newspaper sales) and are remembered in the right way, I hope it's the former.

About the Author

Jonny Mardling is Group Editor at The History Times. He loves to write across a broad spectrum of topics and relishes engaging with others analysis, opinions, and historical knowledge. His main interests are centred on WWII and the Cold War, but with a Great Grandfather who was killed in action at Guillemont on the Somme in 1916 he also has a keen interest in the Great War. 

Read more about Jonny »