🔗 Share this article

A veteran Pentagon journalist recalls numerous occasions throughout their career reporting on the Department of Defense when the actual narrative differed significantly from the official version.

After the capture of Baghdad in 2003, the then defense secretary was openly overjoyed, insisting it signaled the success of the US invasion. Yet, via unofficial conversations with personnel, the journalist quickly discovered a more complicated situation: more forces were needed to protect logistical routes being targeted by loyalists of the deposed regime.

“Did I as a reporter solicit information?” the reporter wrote. “Of course. That is the essence of journalism. Finding out what’s really going on behind the scenes and not accepting wholesale what any government says.

This reporter is among many Pentagon reporters facing the loss of their credentials after refusing to accept a new policy from the Pentagon leadership. The requirement would force journalists to endorse an pledge asserting they will publish only information “officially approved” by the defense department.

Transformation from Watchdogs to Government Agents

Agreeing to such an document would effectively transform reporters “from watchdogs into state functionaries”, as noted by a former head of a major journalism organization and ex- senior editor of a global news agency.

This journalist is in good company. News organizations including leading newspapers, news agencies, and online platforms – including some with conservative viewership – are refusing the ultimatum.

Predictably, a network widely regarded as a state-friendly broadcaster has agreed to comply.

Television Outlets Join the Movement

In a major move, the leading TV networks – including those considered friendly to the government – issued a unified message expressing their opposition.

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

This near-unanimous position is correct – and it is encouraging to see such solidarity. This kind of journalistic cohesion is powerful – and the public could use much more of it, especially when journalists are frequently under siege.

Reporting vs. Transcription

No matter how much the defense chief might wish it, reporting is not stenography, and the officially approved narrative is often only a starting point for more thorough reporting that uncovers the truth.

The policy has been described as a “assault on facts” that clearly threatens the intent of free press guarantees and undermines the citizens' ability to understand what their leaders is undertaking.

The official's reaction to this widespread defiance was characterized by a juvenile use of emojis on online platforms, waving goodbye outlets that refused to submit.

Intensification of Press Restrictions

This newest action represents an escalation in restrictive measures. Not only does the Department of Defense seldom hold media availabilities these days, but earlier it also banned journalists from the majority of the building without an official escort. This departure from past practice impeded the capacity of reporters to collect nuanced information through everyday interactions.

Under the new policy, journalists could be designated a security risk simply for inquiring defense personnel for sensitive information.

Persistence of Journalistic Mission

It is certain that reporters and their organizations will persist to cover the activities of the military, informing the citizens about their leaders' decisions.

Credentials is not everything. In fact, the professional pursuit for proximity to influential figures and institutions – and the impulse to protect that privilege – may impede truthful reporting.

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

“Reporting of the military can be conducted through leaks, public records requests, and other collaborative means harnessing the protections of the law,” the journalist stated. And they can continue to do so, they added, “until this misguided regime sees out its days.”