[link removed]

FAIR
View article on FAIR's website ([link removed])
Trump Turns Pentagon Into Department of War on First Amendment Ari Paul ([link removed])


NBC: Pentagon places further restrictions on journalists' access

NBC News (9/20/25 ([link removed]) ): "Journalists who cover the Defense Department at the Pentagon can no longer gather or report information, even if it is unclassified, unless it’s been authorized for release by the government."

The Trump administration has said it will require Pentagon reporters to “pledge they won’t gather any information—even unclassified—that hasn’t been expressly authorized for release, and will revoke the press credentials of those who do not obey,” the Washington Post (9/19/25 ([link removed]) ) reported. It added that even being in possession of “confidential or unauthorized information, under the new rules, would be grounds for a journalist’s press pass to be revoked.”

The National Press Club (NBC, 9/20/25 ([link removed]) ) called the rules "a direct assault on independent journalism at the very place where independent scrutiny matters most: the US military.’” Even right-wing provocateur James O'Keefe ([link removed]) (The Hill, 9/20/25 ([link removed]) ) came out against the restrictions, saying the US government "should not be asking us to obey.”

Other Trump loyalists stood with the government decision. “For too long, the halls of the Pentagon have been treated like a playground for journalists hungry for gossip, leaks and half-truths,” long-time Republican activist Ken Blackwell said on Facebook (9/20/25 ([link removed]) ). He added that “reporters have strutted around the building like they owned it.”


** The authoritarian impulse
------------------------------------------------------------
Intercept: The Biggest Secret

James Risen (Intercept, 1/3/18 ([link removed]) ): " The Obama administration used my case to destroy the legal underpinnings of the reporter’s privilege in the 4th Circuit.... That will make it easier for Donald Trump and the presidents who come after him to conduct an even more draconian assault on press freedom in the United States."

The US government has always been aggressive when it comes to undermining the press’s ability to obtain government information, especially when it pertains to national security. The pooling system for frontline correspondents in the first US war against Iraq in 1990–91 has long been considered one of the most draconian acts of wartime censorship in recent US imperial memory. The US under the elder President George Bush regularly detained press who dared to report on the war independently and without the restraint of government minders (New York Times, 2/12/91 ([link removed]) ; Human Rights Watch, 2/27/91 ([link removed]) ).

This authoritarian impulse only accelerated in the post-9/11 age (Extra!, 9/11). The Justice Department under then-President Barack Obama obtained “two months of telephone records of reporters and editors for the Associated Press,” AP (5/13/13 ([link removed]) ) reported, in an apparent “investigation into who may have leaked information contained in a May 7, 2012, AP story about a foiled terror plot.”

Former New York Times journalist James Risen ([link removed]) (Intercept, 1/3/18 ([link removed]) ) documented his ordeal with the Obama and George W. Bush administrations, which took legal action against him to force him to release sources:

My case was part of a broader crackdown on reporters and whistleblowers that had begun during the presidency of George W. Bush and continued far more aggressively under the Obama administration, which had already prosecuted more leak cases than all previous administrations combined. Obama officials seemed determined to use criminal leak investigations to limit reporting on national security. But the crackdown on leaks only applied to low-level dissenters; top officials caught up in leak investigations, like former CIA Director David Petraeus, were still treated with kid gloves.


** Full-throttle attack
------------------------------------------------------------
USA Today: Trump suggests FCC should consider revoking TV licenses over negative coverage of him

Donald Trump (USA Today, 9/18/25 ([link removed]) ): "They give me only bad publicity or press.... I would think maybe their license should be taken away."

The new Trump directive transcends this already anti-democratic tradition of suppressing national security and military information, and takes the nation into new authoritarian and absurd territory.

For one thing, telling Pentagon reporters to avoid unreleased information is like telling a fish to avoid water. Recall that top Trump administration officials accidentally included ([link removed]) Atlantic editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg in a Signal chat about an attack on Yemen. To quote Mark Wahlberg from The Departed, “Unfortunately, this shithole has more fuckin’ leaks than the Iraqi navy.”

Now the Pentagon is saying it will only credential reporters if they promise to be stenographers for the department’s press team, regurgitating press releases and spokesperson talking points, and avoid independent interviews and investigations. This is happening as the White House has iced out reporters from the AP for not relabeling an international body of water at the president's directive (FAIR.org, 2/18/25 ([link removed]) ), while bringing administration sycophants like Brian Glenn ([link removed]) and Tim Pool ([link removed]) into the presidential press herd.

Journalist access is only one piece of the Trump administration's full-throttle attack on the free press. The president “said overwhelming negative coverage of him by television networks should be grounds for the Federal Communications Commission to revoke broadcast licenses” (USA Today, 9/18/25 ([link removed]) ). He threatened ABC’s Jon Karl, saying the attorney general will “probably go after people like you, because you treat me so unfairly” (Deadline, 9/16/25 ([link removed]) ). More television and online new outlets are coming under the ownership umbrella of Trump allies (FAIR.org, 9/19/25 ([link removed]) ).


** Imperial bellicosity
------------------------------------------------------------
Independent: Trump promised to be a ‘peacemaker’ president. He launched nearly as many airstrikes in five months as Biden did in four years

Independent (7/15/25 ([link removed]) ): "Trump’s airstrikes in Yemen have reportedly killed as many civilians within the eight-week bombing campaign as in the previous two decades of US attacks targeting militants in the country."

It is especially chilling that this directive came from the Pentagon. The US has the most powerful military in the world, and it is the taxpayer’s largest expense after Social Security. Despite assurances from right-wing media that Trump would be a peace president (Compact, 4/7/23 ([link removed]) ), he is in fact delivering a ferocious brand of imperial bellicosity.

Trump carried out nearly as many airstrikes in the first six months of his second term as the hawkish Joe Biden did in four years (Independent, 7/15/25 ([link removed]) ). Almost as many civilians were killed in his attacks on Yemen as were previously killed in two decades of strikes against that nation (Airwars, 6/17/25 ([link removed]) ).

Trump dropped ([link removed]) 14 of the world's biggest non-nuclear bombs on Iran, weapons that had never been used against an enemy before. He boasted of using the military to murder ([link removed]) supposed Venezuelan drug smugglers, hundreds of miles ([link removed]) from US shores. He resumed shipments of 2,000-pound bombs to Israel, even as he encouraged Tel Aviv to ethnically cleanse Palestinians from Gaza (Guardian, 1/26/25 ([link removed]) ).

Meanwhile, he's deployed ([link removed]) the military domestically, vowing to use it to carry out mass deportations ([link removed]) , renaming ([link removed]) the Department of Defense to the Department of War, firing ([link removed]) top officers who disagree ([link removed]) with him.

If there's ever been a time when we need an independent press keeping a close eye on the military, and listening to dissenting voices, it's now.


** Resisting Pentagon dictates
------------------------------------------------------------
Reuters: News outlets criticize Pentagon's new restrictions on media coverage

Reuters (9/21/25 ([link removed]) ): "Any effort by the US government to limit journalists’ ability to cover the news undermines fundamental First Amendment protections and constrains the free flow of information that is critical to informed public debate."

Thankfully, some news organizations are speaking out against the Pentagon's new edict (Reuters, 9/21/25 ([link removed]) ; CNN, 9/22/25 ([link removed]) ). The New York Times called it an "attempt to throttle the public’s right to understand what their government is doing"; the Washington Post said that "any attempt to control messaging and curb access by the government is counter to the First Amendment and against the public interest."

All major news organizations can and should fight this, in the public and in court; a ban on reporting any unauthorized information clearly violates the First Amendment, and any prior restraint is regarded as constitutionally suspicious ([link removed]) .

News outlets should also bear in mind that reporting on the military does not necessarily require being physically present in the Pentagon. As the brave correspondents showed who defied the US military’s patronizing pooling system in the Gulf War, some of the best reporting is done outside official channels. An independent press corps with no physical access to the Pentagon is infinitely more valuable to democracy than a press corps that has pledged to only report officially sanctioned news.
Read more ([link removed])

Share this post: <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="[link removed]" title="Twitter"><img border="0" height="15" width="15" src="[link removed]" title="Twitter" alt="Twitter" class="mc-share"></a>
<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="[link removed]" title="Facebook"><img border="0" height="15" width="15" src="[link removed]" title="Facebook" alt="Facebook" class="mc-share"></a>
<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="[link removed]" title="Pinterest"><img border="0" height="15" width="15" src="[link removed]" title="Pinterest" alt="Pinterest" class="mc-share"></a>
<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="[link removed]" title="LinkedIn"><img border="0" height="15" width="15" src="[link removed]" title="LinkedIn" alt="LinkedIn" class="mc-share"></a>
<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="[link removed]" title="Google Plus"><img border="0" height="15" width="15" src="[link removed]" title="Google Plus" alt="Google Plus" class="mc-share"></a>
<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="[link removed]" title="Instapaper"><img border="0" height="15" width="15" src="[link removed]" title="Instapaper" alt="Instapaper" class="mc-share"></a>
​

© 2021 Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting. All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you signed up for email alerts from
Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting

Our mailing address is:
FAIRNESS & ACCURACY IN REPORTING
124 W. 30th Street, Suite 201
New York, NY 10001

FAIR's Website ([link removed])

FAIR counts on your support to do this work — please donate today ([link removed]) .

Follow us on Twitter ([link removed]) | Friend us on Facebook ([link removed])

change your preferences ([link removed])
Email Marketing Powered by Mailchimp
[link removed]
unsubscribe ([link removed]) .