🔗 Share this article

A veteran Pentagon journalist recalls many instances during their years covering the Department of Defense when the real narrative diverged substantially from the approved account.

After the capture of Baghdad in 2003, the at that time head of the Pentagon was openly ecstatic, insisting it demonstrated the success of the military campaign. However, via unofficial conversations with personnel, the journalist quickly learned a more complicated reality: additional forces were needed to protect logistical routes under attack by loyalists of the deposed regime.

“Did I as a reporter solicit information?” the reporter wrote. “Of course. It’s called journalism. Uncovering the actual events behind the scenes and not accepting wholesale official statements says.

This reporter is among numerous defense correspondents confronting the revocation of their credentials after refusing to agree to a new directive from the defense chief. The requirement would mandate reporters to sign an pledge stating they will solely report information “explicitly authorized” by the military establishment.

Transformation from Watchdogs to Government Agents

Signing such an agreement would essentially convert reporters “from independent observers into government mouthpieces”, as noted by a previous head of a major press association and former editor of a global news agency.

This individual is not alone. News organizations including major newspapers, news agencies, and digital outlets – including some with right-leaning audiences – are rejecting the demand.

Predictably, a outlet widely regarded as a propaganda outfit has agreed to comply.

Television Outlets Support the Movement

In a major move, the major TV networks – including those seen as friendly to the government – released a unified message stating their opposition.

“The directive is unprecedented and threatens fundamental press freedoms,” they announced. “We will continue to cover the armed forces as we has done for generations, upholding the values of a independent media.”

This near-unanimous position is justified – and it is encouraging to see such solidarity. This type of press unity is formidable – and the public could benefit from much more of it, especially when journalists are often under siege.

Reporting vs. Transcription

No matter how much the defense chief might wish it, journalism is not mere transcription, and the government-sanctioned narrative is often only a beginning for more thorough reporting that uncovers the facts.

The directive has been described as a “war on truth” that clearly threatens the purpose of constitutional protections and undermines the public’s right to know what their leaders is doing.

The defense chief's response to this near-universal rejection was marked by a childish use of emojis on online platforms, waving goodbye outlets that declined to submit.

Intensification of Media Controls

This latest effort represents an escalation in restrictive measures. Not only does the Department of Defense seldom hold media availabilities these days, but previously it also prohibited journalists from most of the facility without an official escort. This departure from past practice impeded the capacity of correspondents to collect nuanced information through everyday contacts.

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

Persistence of The Press

It is clear that journalists and their news outlets will continue to report on the activities of the Pentagon, informing the public about their government's decisions.

Credentials is not everything. In fact, the professional pursuit for proximity to influential figures and organizations – and the impulse to protect that access – may hinder accurate reporting.

As a former reporter observed, reporters can keep doing their jobs through methods other than relaying government-sanctioned information to the public.

“Coverage 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 persist in this work, they added, “till this benighted regime sees out its days.”