🔗 Share this article

A veteran Pentagon journalist remembers many instances during their career reporting on the defense establishment when the real story differed substantially from the official account.

After the capture of Baghdad in 2003, the then defense secretary was openly ecstatic, insisting it demonstrated the triumph of the US invasion. Yet, via informal conversations with military officers, the journalist quickly discovered a more complicated reality: more forces were needed to protect logistical routes being targeted by loyalists of the former government.

“Did I as a reporter solicit information?” the reporter wrote. “Of course. That is the essence of journalism. Uncovering what’s really going on behind the scenes and not accepting wholesale what any government says.

This reporter is one of many defense correspondents facing the loss of their official access after refusing to agree to a controversial policy from the defense chief. The requirement would mandate journalists to endorse an pledge stating they will publish only information “explicitly authorized” by the defense department.

Shift from Watchdogs to State Functionaries

Signing such an agreement would essentially convert journalists “from independent observers into government mouthpieces”, according to a previous chairman of a major press association and former editor of a global news agency.

This individual is not alone. Media outlets such as major publications, news agencies, and online platforms – even some with conservative audiences – are refusing the ultimatum.

Predictably, a network known as a propaganda outfit has agreed to comply.

Television Outlets Join the Movement

In a significant development, the leading broadcasters – including those seen as friendly to the government – issued a joint statement stating their rejection.

“The policy is unprecedented and endangers fundamental press freedoms,” they announced. “We will continue to cover the armed forces as we has done for many decades, maintaining the values of a independent media.”

This vast majority stance is correct – and it is encouraging to see such unity. This type of journalistic cohesion is powerful – and the public could use more of it, especially when the press are often under siege.

Reporting vs. Transcription

No matter how much the Pentagon leadership might desire it, journalism is not stenography, and the officially approved narrative is often only a starting point for deeper investigation that reveals the facts.

The directive has been characterized as a “war on truth” that clearly threatens the intent of constitutional protections and erodes the public’s right to know what their government is undertaking.

The defense chief's reaction to this near-universal rejection was marked by a juvenile use of digital icons on social media, waving goodbye organizations that declined to comply.

Escalation of Media Controls

This newest action represents an escalation in restrictive measures. Not only does the Department of Defense rarely hold media availabilities now, but previously it also prohibited journalists from the majority of the building without an minder. This departure from historical precedent impeded the ability of correspondents to gather detailed information through everyday contacts.

Under the revised rules, reporters could be labeled a security risk simply for inquiring defense personnel for confidential information.

Persistence of Journalistic Mission

It is clear that reporters and their news outlets will continue to report on the operations of the Pentagon, educating the public about their government's actions.

Access is not everything. In fact, the journalistic quest for access to powerful people and organizations – and the desire to maintain that privilege – may hinder truthful journalism.

As a previous journalist noted, the press can continue doing their jobs through methods other than transmitting government-sanctioned information to the audience.

“Reporting of the military can be conducted through leaks, public records requests, and other cooperative methods utilizing the protections of the law,” the journalist stated. And they can continue to do so, they added, “till this misguided administration sees out its days.”