🔗 Share this article

An experienced military reporter recalls many instances throughout their career covering the defense establishment when the actual narrative diverged substantially from the official account.

After the capture of Baghdad in 2003, the at that time head of the Pentagon was openly overjoyed, insisting it demonstrated the success of the military campaign. However, through informal conversations with military officers, the journalist quickly discovered a more complex situation: more forces were required to protect logistical routes under attack by loyalists of the former regime.

“Did I as a reporter solicit information?” the reporter wrote. “Naturally. It’s called journalism. Finding out the actual events behind the scenes and refusing to accept wholesale official statements says.

This reporter is among many Pentagon reporters facing the revocation of their official access after declining to accept a new directive from the defense chief. The rule would force reporters to endorse an pledge asserting they will solely report information “officially approved” by the defense department.

Shift from Overseers to Government Agents

Signing such an agreement would essentially transform journalists “from watchdogs into state functionaries”, according to a previous chairman of a major press association and ex- senior editor of a international wire service.

This journalist is in good company. Media outlets including leading publications, wire services, and online platforms – even some with right-leaning viewership – are refusing the demand.

Predictably, a outlet known as a state-friendly broadcaster has agreed to comply.

Broadcast Networks Support the Movement

In a major development, the major TV networks – including those considered friendly to the government – released a joint statement stating their rejection.

“The policy is without precedent and threatens core press freedoms,” the statement declared. “We will continue to report on the armed forces as we has done for many decades, upholding the values of a independent media.”

This vast majority stance is justified – and it is encouraging to witness such solidarity. This type of journalistic cohesion is formidable – and society could use much more of it, especially when the press are often targeted.

Journalism vs. Stenography

No matter how much the Pentagon leadership might desire it, reporting is not stenography, and the officially approved story is often only a starting point for more thorough investigation that uncovers the truth.

The policy has been characterized as a “assault on facts” that clearly threatens the purpose of constitutional protections and undermines the public’s right to know what their government is doing.

The defense chief's reaction to this widespread defiance was characterized by a childish display of digital icons on online platforms, dismissing organizations that refused to comply.

Escalation of Media Controls

This latest action represents an escalation in controls. Not only does the Department of Defense rarely hold media availabilities now, but earlier it also banned journalists from the majority of the facility without an official escort. This deviation from past practice impeded the ability of reporters to gather nuanced information through routine interactions.

Under the new policy, reporters could be designated a threat simply for inquiring defense personnel for confidential information.

Determination of Journalistic Mission

It is clear that reporters and their organizations will persist to report on the operations of the military, informing the public about their leaders' actions.

Access isn’t paramount. In fact, the journalistic quest for proximity to influential figures and institutions – and the impulse to maintain that privilege – may hinder accurate journalism.

As a previous journalist noted, the press can keep doing their jobs through methods other than relaying officially approved information to the audience.

“Coverage of the military can be conducted through unauthorized disclosures, freedom of information petitions, and other collaborative methods harnessing the legal system’s protections,” the journalist stated. And they can persist in this work, they added, “until this benighted administration reaches its conclusion.”