🔗 Share this article

An experienced military journalist recalls numerous occasions throughout their years covering the Department of Defense when the real narrative diverged significantly from the approved account.

After the capture of Baghdad in 2003, the at that time head of the Pentagon was publicly overjoyed, insisting it signaled the triumph of the US invasion. However, through informal conversations with personnel, the journalist soon discovered a more complicated reality: more American troops were required to protect supply lines under attack by supporters of the deposed regime.

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

This journalist is among numerous Pentagon reporters confronting the revocation of their credentials after declining to agree to a controversial policy from the Pentagon leadership. The rule would mandate journalists to endorse an pledge stating they will solely report information “officially approved” by the defense department.

Transformation from Watchdogs to State Functionaries

Signing such an agreement would essentially transform journalists “from independent observers into government mouthpieces”, as noted by a former head of a prominent journalism organization and former editor of a international wire service.

This journalist is not alone. Media outlets including major publications, news agencies, and digital outlets – including some with conservative audiences – are rejecting the demand.

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

Broadcast Networks Support the Protest

In a major development, the major broadcasters – including those considered supportive of the current administration – released a joint statement expressing their opposition.

“The directive is unprecedented and threatens core press freedoms,” they announced. “We will continue to report on the US military as each of our organizations has done for many decades, upholding the values of a free and independent press.”

This vast majority stance is correct – and it is encouraging to witness such unity. This type of journalistic cohesion is formidable – and society could use more of it, particularly when journalists are frequently under siege.

Journalism vs. Stenography

No matter how much the Pentagon leadership might wish it, reporting is not stenography, and the officially approved narrative is often only a beginning for more thorough reporting that uncovers the truth.

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

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

Intensification of Press Restrictions

This latest action constitutes an increase in controls. Not only does the Department of Defense seldom hold media availabilities now, but earlier it also banned journalists from most of the facility without an minder. This departure from historical precedent hindered the ability of correspondents to collect nuanced information through everyday contacts.

Under the new policy, journalists could be designated a security risk simply for inquiring Pentagon employees for confidential information.

Determination of Journalistic Mission

It is certain that reporters and their news outlets will continue to cover the operations of the military, educating the citizens about their leaders' decisions.

Credentials isn’t paramount. In fact, the professional pursuit for proximity to powerful people and institutions – and the impulse to maintain that privilege – may impede accurate reporting.

As a former reporter noted, the press can continue performing their duties through means other than transmitting government-sanctioned information to the audience.

“Coverage of the military can be pursued through unauthorized disclosures, public records requests, and other cooperative means harnessing the protections of the law,” the journalist stated. And they can persist in this work, they added, “until this misguided administration reaches its conclusion.”