🔗 Share this article

A veteran Pentagon reporter remembers numerous instances throughout their years covering the Department of Defense when the actual narrative diverged significantly from the approved version.

After the capture of Baghdad in 2003, the at that time defense secretary was publicly overjoyed, insisting it signaled the success of the military campaign. Yet, via informal discussions with personnel, the journalist soon learned a more complex reality: additional American troops were required to protect logistical routes under attack by supporters of the deposed government.

“Did I as a reporter solicit information?” they stated. “Naturally. It’s called journalism. Uncovering the actual events away from public view and refusing to accept completely official statements claims.”

This reporter is among numerous Pentagon reporters facing the revocation of their credentials after declining to accept a controversial directive from the Pentagon leadership. The requirement would mandate journalists to sign an pledge stating they will publish only information “officially approved” by the military establishment.

Transformation from Overseers to State Functionaries

Signing such an document would effectively transform journalists “from watchdogs into state functionaries”, as noted by a former chairman of a major press association and ex- editor of a international wire service.

This journalist is in good company. News organizations including major newspapers, wire services, and digital outlets – even some with conservative audiences – are refusing the demand.

Unsurprisingly, a network known as a propaganda outfit has agreed to sign.

Television Outlets Support the Protest

In a significant move, the leading broadcasters – including those considered friendly to the government – issued a joint statement stating their opposition.

“The directive is unprecedented and threatens core journalistic protections,” they announced. “We will persist to report on the US military as each of our organizations has done for generations, upholding the values of a independent media.”

This vast majority position is correct – and it is encouraging to see such solidarity. This kind of press unity is powerful – and society could benefit from more of it, particularly when journalists are frequently targeted.

Reporting vs. Transcription

No matter how much the Pentagon leadership might wish it, reporting is not stenography, and the government-sanctioned narrative is frequently only a starting point for more thorough reporting that reveals the facts.

The policy has been characterized as a “war on truth” that obviously threatens the purpose of constitutional protections and undermines the citizens' ability to know what their leaders is doing.

The defense chief's response to this near-universal rejection was marked by a juvenile display of emojis on social media, waving goodbye organizations that refused to submit.

Escalation of Press Restrictions

This latest action represents an escalation in restrictive measures. Not only does the Department of Defense seldom hold press briefings these days, but earlier it also banned journalists from most of the facility without an minder. This departure from past practice hindered the ability of correspondents to collect detailed information through routine interactions.

Under the revised rules, reporters could be labeled a threat simply for asking Pentagon employees for confidential information.

Determination of Journalistic Mission

It is certain that reporters and their organizations will continue to cover the operations of the Pentagon, informing the citizens about their leaders' decisions.

Access isn’t everything. In fact, the journalistic quest for access to influential figures and organizations – and the desire to maintain that privilege – may impede accurate journalism.

As a former journalist noted, reporters can continue performing their duties through means besides relaying officially approved information to the public.

“Reporting of the armed forces can be conducted through unauthorized disclosures, freedom of information petitions, and additional collaborative means utilizing the legal system’s protections,” the journalist stated. And they can persist in this work, it was noted, “until this benighted administration sees out its days.”