Several members of the 34-strong team which reported the war to the public back home have voiced anger at the assertion their role was not providing support to troops in battle and therefore they do not qualify.

David Brown, who did two tours in the south of Vietnam, called it a grave injustice that Iraq and Afghanistan public relations officers received the badge for the same tasks.

The snub "perpetuates the blatant discrimination between today's Australian Army Public Relations Service men who are awarded the ACB for service in Iraq and Afghanistan, and yesterday's PR Vietnam veterans who are denied it," Mr Brown wrote in a letter to The Canberra Times.

Peter Thomas served in Vietnam in '68 and '69, covering everything from "motor vehicle workshops to some pretty grim operations".

"I reckon I spent almost 200 days of the 365 in the bush at various fireplaces working with elements of every battalion that went through Vietnam," Mr Thomas said.

"We would fly in on helicopters, we would spend three, four, five or six days with an element of one of the battalions, or the tanks, or the armoured personnel carriers, we would get our stories and our photos and we'd fly back to base to dispatch all that material," he said.

Mr Thomas said there was often only a single day's rest in Nui Dat before they were sent to the next operation.

Upon returning, Mr Thomas developed pancreatic cancer which the Department of Veterans Affairs recognised was a result of Agent Orange.

Mr Thomas said he has since suffered anxiety, depression and panic attacks as a result of his tour.

A fellow Vietnam vet and historian who asked not to be named said while he sympathised with the plight of the public relations officers, the army had to set a criteria.

"It is always the case with any badge or medal the army gives that there are people who get it who are not worthy in some way," he said.

The historian used the example of awarding the Infantry Combat Badge to the person who worked in the quartermasters store handing out blankets, simply because they were part of a unit which qualified.

The Vietnam vet said the army had created a set criteria to avoid this scenario, and in the case of the ACB, it was direct support to combat troops.

READ ALSO:

"If I had someone from public relations with me in my platoon in Vietnam, he was not supporting my platoon in any way at all, he didn't make my platoon fight better," the vet said.

The Canberra Times spoke to a second Vietnam war researcher who said qualification for the ACB was based on where they sat on the organisational structure, despite the tasks they undertook.

A Defence spokesperson said the Australian Army did not dispute that some of the public relations officer's duties would have been to accompany Arms Corps elements into the field. The issue was providing support was not their primary role.

The spokesperson said public relations personnel who received the ACB for service in Afghanistan and Iraq were awarded it on the basis that they were force assigned to a combat element or battle group, which met the requirement.

Similar to the situation in Vietnam, personnel force assigned to the theatre-level headquarters in Afghanistan and Iraq were also not eligible for the ACB, as they did not meet the requirements, the Defence spokesperson said.

They said today's personnel were force assigned to combat elements to undertake more than just public relations duties, a contemporary construct which was not used for public relations personnel in Vietnam.