🔗 Share this article

An experienced Pentagon reporter recalls numerous instances throughout his years covering the defense establishment when the real narrative differed substantially from the approved account.

After the capture of Baghdad in 2003, the at that time head of the Pentagon was openly ecstatic, claiming it signaled the triumph of the US invasion. However, via informal discussions with personnel, the reporter quickly discovered a more complex reality: more American troops were needed to secure supply lines being targeted by supporters of the former 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 behind the scenes and refusing to accept wholesale official statements says.

This reporter is one of many defense correspondents facing the loss of their credentials after declining to accept a new directive from the defense chief. The rule would mandate reporters to endorse an agreement asserting they will publish only information “officially approved” by the military establishment.

Transformation from Watchdogs to Government Agents

Signing such an document would effectively convert reporters “from independent observers into government mouthpieces”, as noted by a previous head of a major press association and former editor of a international wire service.

This journalist is not alone. News organizations such as leading newspapers, wire services, and online platforms – even some with right-leaning viewership – are refusing the ultimatum.

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

Television Outlets Support the Protest

In a significant development, the leading broadcasters – even those considered supportive of the current administration – released a unified message stating their opposition.

“The directive is unprecedented and threatens fundamental press freedoms,” the statement declared. “We will persist to cover the US military as we has done for generations, upholding the values of a free and independent press.”

This vast majority position is correct – and it is heartening to see such unity. This type of press unity is powerful – and the public could benefit from more of it, particularly when journalists are often targeted.

Reporting vs. Transcription

No matter how much the Pentagon leadership might wish it, journalism is not stenography, and the government-sanctioned story is often only a beginning for more thorough investigation that reveals the facts.

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

The defense chief's reaction to this near-universal rejection was marked by a juvenile display of emojis on social media, dismissing outlets that declined to comply.

Intensification of Media Controls

This latest action constitutes an increase in restrictive measures. Not only does the Pentagon seldom hold press briefings now, but earlier it also banned reporters from most of the facility without an minder. This departure from historical precedent hindered the capacity of reporters to collect detailed information through everyday contacts.

Under the revised rules, reporters could be designated a security risk simply for inquiring Pentagon employees for confidential information.

Determination of The Press

It is clear that journalists and their organizations will continue to report on the operations of the military, educating the public about their leaders' actions.

Credentials isn’t paramount. In fact, the professional pursuit for access to influential figures and organizations – and the impulse to protect that access – may impede truthful reporting.

As a previous reporter observed, reporters can continue performing their duties through methods other than relaying officially approved information to the audience.

“Coverage of the armed forces can be conducted through unauthorized disclosures, public records requests, and other collaborative methods harnessing the legal system’s protections,” the journalist stated. And they can continue to do so, it was noted, “until this misguided administration sees out its days.”