The Trump administration is seemingly trying to do everything in its power to stifle the free press in this country.
Trump’s White House got Congress to cut funding for public media. It has sued news organizations. It has banned respected media outlets, such as the Associated Press, from certain access to the president.
And, of course, Trump has spent a decade insulting the media by calling them “fake news” and “enemy of the people” in an obvious attempt to mute coverage he doesn’t like and sow mistrust to strengthen his power.
But the media is not taking the latest administration threats and actions quietly.
In a notable united stand, media organizations from across the political spectrum have banded together to fight back against the latest restrictions on their coverage.
Tuesday was the deadline for journalists to sign the latest press policy of the Pentagon under Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. As my colleague, Angela Fu, wrote in Tuesday’s newsletter, “The new policy warns that reporters who ‘solicit’ Department of Defense employees to disclose nonpublic information that has not been approved for release could lose their press credentials. The new rules’ breadth and inclusion of unclassified information mark a significant departure from past policy.”
On Tuesday, ABC, CBS, CNN, Fox News and NBC put out a joint statement that said: “Today, we join virtually every other news organization in declining to agree to the Pentagon’s new requirements, which would restrict journalists’ ability to keep the nation and the world informed of important national security issues. The policy is without precedent and threatens core journalistic protections. We will continue to cover the U.S. military as each of our organizations has done for many decades, upholding the principles of a free and independent press.”
As The Washington Post’s Scott Nover pointed out, “Fox’s dissent is notable considering the Trump-friendly views of many of its opinion hosts, whose ranks previously included Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.”
That’s right. Even the network that used to employ Pete Hegseth said Hegseth’s policy is wrong.
The Associated Press issued its own statement on Tuesday saying, “The Pentagon’s new press policy undermines the First Amendment and AP’s core values as an independent global news organization. The restrictions impede the public’s access to information about their government and limit the people’s right to know. AP remains focused on continuing to produce strong independent coverage of the Pentagon in the public interest.”
In addition, NewsNation and The Hill also announced they wouldn’t be signing the new policy.
Those organizations joined several that which previously announced they would not sign, including The New York Times, The Washington Post, Reuters, The Wall Street Journal, NPR, HuffPost, Bloomberg, The Atlantic and even conservative outlets such as Newsmax and the Washington Times.
Unsurprisingly, One America News, which has always been a fierce supporter of Trump, is, as far as anyone can tell, the only outlet to actually sign the policy.
On social media, Hegseth responded with the “goodbye” emoji to outlets saying they wouldn’t agree to the new restrictions. He has said those who do not agree with the new policy would be kicked out of the Pentagon.
As The AP’s David Bauder explained, “The Pentagon has said the rules establish ‘common sense media procedures’ and want news outlets to sign a statement acknowledging them, even if they don’t agree with them. The news outlets have said that they are concerned, however, that their reporters will be subject to expulsion if they simply try to report news not approved by Hegseth.”
That’s the bottom line: The Pentagon wants complete control over what is reported about the department.
The Atlantic’s Nancy Youssef tweeted, “Starting Wednesday, for the first time since the Pentagon opened in 1943, there will be likely no major news outlets accredited to cover the dept, the one spending nearly $1 trillion of taxpayer money.” She then linked to the Pentagon Press Association’s lengthy statement about the policy.
On Tuesday, Trump defended Hegseth and the policy, telling reporters, “I’ll let him speak for himself, but I think he finds the press to be very disruptive in terms of world peace and maybe security for our nation.”
Even more alarming, Trump then seemed to suggest that those who cover the White House could have access diminished.
Trump said, “You know, we have an option here to, as you know, the press years ago moved into the White House. It used to be across the street. We could move them. You’re lucky I’m president, because we could move them very easily across the street. They used to have … they would have more room. We have a beautiful, nice space. You could sit all by yourselves and have fun. Instead, you walk around the White House talking to anybody that can breathe.”
To be clear, this all does not mean reporters will stop reporting on the Pentagon and, for that matter, the White House.
As Bauder wrote, “The news organizations who have rejected the rules all say they will continue covering the U.S. military, even without being permitted on the Pentagon grounds. Barring a change from either side, the case looks to be headed for court.”
Meanwhile, the Pentagon Press Association said, “Our members did nothing to create this disturbing situation. It arises from an entirely one-sided move by Pentagon officials apparently intent upon cutting the American public off from information they do not control and pre-approve.”
Why it matters
On Tuesday, NPR Pentagon reporter Tom Bowman wrote: “Why I'm handing in my Pentagon press pass.”
Bowman writes in his piece, “Signing that document would make us stenographers parroting press releases, not watchdogs holding government officials accountable.”
Bowman has had a Pentagon press pass for 28 years — meaning he has covered many administrations on both sides of the political aisle. He described why it was important to be inside the Pentagon, talking to sources and getting information that was important for the public to know. He gave several examples.
Then he added, “So yes, we've received solicited and unsolicited information on everything from failed policies and botched military operations that led to unnecessary military and civilian deaths, to wasteful government projects that both Democratic and Republican administrations would rather stay in the shadows. That's our job.”
He closed by saying, “So now, how will the American people find out what is being done at the Pentagon in their name, with their hard-earned tax dollars, and more importantly, the decisions that may put their sons and daughters in harm's way? With no reporters able to ask questions, it seems the Pentagon leadership will continue to rely on slick social media posts, carefully orchestrated short videos and interviews with partisan commentators and podcasters. No one should think that's good enough.”
A special story
On Tuesday, Poynter published another in our series called The Poynter 50 — our project looking back at 50 of the most significant media moments and people of the past 50 years.
And this one is particularly special: “Gary Hart’s scandal brought down a candidate and changed how political journalism covers private lives.”
This story is special for two reasons. One, it’s deeply reported and superbly told. And, second, it was the final story of our dear Poynter colleague Rick Edmonds, who passed away on Oct. 5.
It’s a story worthy of your time.
Don’t sign here please
