This week, the Pentagon implemented new restrictions for journalists covering the department. These rules mandate that reporters commit to refraining from collecting or publishing information not officially cleared for public release, even if it is unclassified. The Pentagon indicated that non-compliance with these new regulations could result in the revocation of press credentials.
“The ‘press’ does not control the Pentagon — the populace does. Journalists are no longer permitted to freely access the corridors of a secure establishment. Display a badge and adhere to regulations — or depart,” the Defense Department declared.
In a 17-page memo circulated on Friday, the Department of Defense announced that, in addition to the updated reporting rules, the approximately 90 credentialed journalists covering the Pentagon will now be barred from several floors of the building unless accompanied by a government escort. This significantly curtails the movement of reporters who largely enjoyed unrestricted access to the building’s corridors previously.
Seasoned members of the Pentagon press corps and advocates for press freedom broadly criticized this action, describing it as a disturbing departure from precedents established by administrations over many decades.
“It is entirely an intimidation tactic. It is wholly an effort to eliminate transparency and channel all public information through the government, which contradicts every conceivable constitutional principle of free speech,” Kevin Baron, who formerly served as vice president of the Pentagon Press Association and covered the Pentagon for 15 years, informed TIME.
Baron highlighted that for decades, Pentagon journalists were able to move unhindered not only within the DoD headquarters but also within the press offices of all service branches, including the Navy and Army. He contended that these new restrictions completely impede reporters from fulfilling their duties. Over his fifteen years as a Pentagon beat reporter, Baron stated it was exceedingly uncommon for him to be required to sign any document, with such instances occurring solely when his reporting had implications for the safety of individuals entering conflict areas.
Seth Stern from the Free Press Foundation asserted that the directive contravenes decades of legal precedents concerning journalists’ lawful acquisition and publication of government secrets. He characterized the policy as “fundamentally un-American.”
“This policy functions as a prior restraint on publication, which is regarded as the gravest infringement of the First Amendment,” Stern stated. “[T]he government cannot bar journalists from public information simply by asserting it is classified or poses a national security risk.”
Stern expressed his hope that journalists would resist the Pentagon’s new regulations, and if necessary, relinquish their access.
“Consenting not to investigate areas the government wishes to conceal and, consequently, not to publish what it seeks to suppress, constitutes propaganda, not journalism,” Stern remarked.
Mike Balsamo, president of the National Press Club, described the measure as a “direct assault on independent journalism.”
“If information concerning our military requires government pre-approval, then the public ceases to receive impartial reporting,” Balsamo asserted in a statement. “Instead, they are presented with only what officials desire them to perceive. This ought to concern every American.”
This action emerges amidst intense examination of how the U.S. military and the broader government interact with the press.
These new regulations succeed earlier movement restrictions Hegseth imposed on journalists in May, following several significant media leaks during his initial months in office. A particularly serious incident occurred after a report detailed his accidental inclusion in a Signal group chat with national-security officials discussing impending military actions in Yemen. Hegseth has consistently refuted this account.
The Pentagon, specifically, has maintained a strained, if not adversarial, relationship with the press. In February, Hegseth implemented an “annual media rotation program,” which effectively displaced several news organizations, such as NBC News, The New York Times, and National Public Radio (NPR), from their Pentagon offices. This program aimed to introduce new, conservative outlets, including One American Network, Newsmax, and Breitbart, alongside the more progressive HuffPost.
Following a Trump Administration action, Hegseth garnered attention for persistently criticizing the Pentagon’s media corps. He urged them to concentrate on the specifics of missions executed by the U.S. military, instead of focusing on leaked intelligence suggesting that the impact of U.S. strikes was less significant than intended.
The Pentagon’s aggressive stance against the press aligns with the Trump Administration’s broader initiatives to curtail media coverage and journalistic access. During his initial nine months in office, President Donald Trump also filed lawsuits against several news organizations, including The New York Times, concerning their reporting.
Only this week, Brendan Carr, the head of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), warned television stations of potential “fines or license revocation” should they persist in broadcasting Jimmy Kimmel Live!, the comedian’s late-night program, due to remarks Kimmel made regarding a recent incident. Shortly thereafter, an action occurred that has drawn censure from free speech proponents. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) characterized this as merely one step in Trump’s “unconstitutional scheme to silence his detractors and dictate what Americans consume and read.”