🔗 Share this article

An experienced Pentagon reporter recalls numerous instances throughout his years covering the defense establishment when the actual story differed significantly from the official account.

Following the capture of Baghdad in 2003, the then defense secretary was openly ecstatic, insisting it demonstrated the success of the US invasion. However, through informal discussions with personnel, the reporter quickly learned a more complex situation: additional American troops were needed to protect logistical routes being targeted by supporters of the deposed regime.

“Did I as a reporter solicit information?” they stated. “Of course. That is the essence of journalism. Finding out what’s really going on away from public view and refusing to accept wholesale official statements says.

This journalist is among numerous Pentagon reporters confronting the revocation of their credentials after declining to accept a new policy from the defense chief. The rule would mandate journalists to endorse an pledge asserting they will publish only information “explicitly authorized” by the military establishment.

Transformation from Watchdogs to State Functionaries

Signing such an document would essentially transform journalists “from independent observers into government mouthpieces”, according to a previous head of a major journalism organization and former editor of a global news agency.

This journalist is not alone. Media outlets such as major publications, news agencies, and digital outlets – even some with right-leaning audiences – are rejecting the demand.

Unsurprisingly, a outlet widely regarded as a propaganda outfit has consented to comply.

Television Outlets Join the Protest

In a major development, the leading TV networks – including those seen as supportive of the government – released a unified message stating their rejection.

“The policy is without precedent and endangers core journalistic protections,” they announced. “We will persist to report on the armed forces as each of our organizations has done for many decades, maintaining the values of a independent media.”

This vast majority position is justified – and it is encouraging to witness such unity. This kind of press unity is powerful – and the public could use much more of it, especially when the press are often under siege.

Journalism vs. Stenography

No matter how much the Pentagon leadership might desire it, journalism is not mere transcription, and the officially approved story is frequently only a beginning for more thorough reporting that uncovers the truth.

The policy has been characterized as a “assault on facts” that obviously imperils the purpose of constitutional protections and undermines the citizens' ability to know what their government is doing.

The defense chief's reaction to this widespread defiance was marked by a childish use of emojis on social media, dismissing organizations that refused to comply.

Escalation of Media Controls

This newest action constitutes an escalation in restrictive measures. Not only does the Pentagon rarely hold media availabilities these days, but previously it also banned reporters from the majority of the building without an official escort. This deviation from historical precedent impeded the ability of reporters to collect nuanced information through routine contacts.

Under the revised rules, journalists could be labeled a threat simply for inquiring defense personnel for sensitive information.

Persistence of Journalistic Mission

It is certain that journalists and their news outlets will persist to report on the operations of the Pentagon, informing the public about their leaders' actions.

Credentials is not everything. In fact, the journalistic quest for access to influential figures and organizations – and the impulse to maintain that privilege – may impede truthful journalism.

As a former journalist noted, the press can continue doing their jobs through methods besides transmitting government-sanctioned information to the public.

“Reporting of the armed forces can be pursued through unauthorized disclosures, public records requests, and other collaborative means harnessing the protections of the law,” they noted. And they can continue to do so, they added, “till this benighted regime reaches its conclusion.”