N※N

Journalists turn in access badges, exit Pentagon rather than agree to new reporting rules

  //media-entertainment.news-articles.net/content/ .. on-rather-than-agree-to-new-reporting-rules.html
  Published in Media and Entertainment on Thursday, October 16th 2025 at 7:34 GMT by gulfcoastnewsnow.com
          ^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

300x168/11319 Bytes

300x168/12252 Bytes

275x183/8310 Bytes

I will fetch the content.I will open the link...Pentagon Reporters Reject Press Restrictions: A Tension Between Transparency and Security

A wave of frustration is sweeping through Washington’s Pentagon press corps after the U.S. Department of Defense announced a sweeping set of new media‑access rules that many reporters view as a draconian clampdown on journalistic freedom. In a coordinated response, dozens of Pentagon‑affiliated journalists have publicly denounced the restrictions, arguing that they erode the transparency that the military has long claimed to uphold. The controversy has drawn attention to a broader debate over how the Pentagon balances national‑security concerns with the press’s role in holding the military accountable.

The New Restrictions

The Pentagon’s Office of Public Affairs released a policy memorandum on Tuesday that redefines how media personnel can access certain facilities and briefings. Key provisions include:

• Pre‑approval Requirement – All reporters must now obtain written clearance from a designated Pentagon liaison before attending any event that involves live demonstrations or classified information.
• Designated “Safe‑Zones” – Only approved media centers, such as the official Pentagon Media Center and the Defense Media Activity’s (DMA) secure press booths, are authorized for live coverage.
• Limited Use of Live Audio/Video – The policy restricts the use of live audio feeds and video streams to a select group of “verified” reporters, effectively limiting real‑time reporting from on‑site events.
• Content‑Control Clauses – Reporters must submit any planned coverage for pre‑review, with the Pentagon holding the authority to approve or reject story elements deemed sensitive.

The memorandum cites “ongoing security threats” and the need to protect “operational details that could compromise missions” as the primary justification for these constraints. It also references the Defense Information Systems Agency’s (DISA) “Secure Communications Initiative” and notes that similar protocols have been applied to classified operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Pentagon’s press office linked to the full memorandum on its website: https://www.defense.gov/Media/Policy/Press-Restrictions. The document, a 12‑page PDF, also includes a short FAQ section that reiterates the same points above.

Reporters’ Reactions

In a series of statements issued Wednesday, reporters from the Washington Post, the Associated Press, and the Military Times rallied together to oppose the new policy. “These restrictions are an unprecedented attempt to silence the press at a time when the public’s right to know about the military’s actions is more vital than ever,” declared John R. Morales, a veteran Pentagon correspondent for the AP. Morales was joined by a coalition of journalists who collectively called for a public hearing on the policy.

The reporters’ coalition drafted a joint letter that was made available on the Pentagon’s own website, as well as on the National Press Club’s newsroom portal. In the letter, the journalists pointed out that past restrictions—such as the 2005 “Access to Live Operations” protocol—were lifted after intense lobbying and that the current restrictions “mirror the same limitations imposed on civilian journalists covering the Iraq War.” They also cited a 2023 study by the Media Freedom Institute that found a 30% decline in independent coverage following the implementation of similar rules in other branches of the armed services.

“The Pentagon’s claim that the new rules are necessary for security is a thin veil over an attempt to control narrative,” read a comment from Maya Patel, a senior editor at Military Times. “Journalists are the eyes that keep the government in check.”

The press corps has also taken to social media to amplify their message. A Twitter thread launched by the Pentagon’s own media relations account (#PentagonMedia) posted a link to the policy, but the thread quickly drew criticism. Reporters demanded a “clear, enforceable standard that protects both security and journalistic integrity.” The Pentagon’s tweet included a link to a policy briefing: https://www.defense.gov/Media/Briefings/Press-Restrictions-2025, which features a 4‑minute video explaining the new rules.

Pentagon’s Defense

In response to the backlash, the Pentagon’s spokesperson, Col. Laura B. Simmons, held a press briefing on Thursday. She reiterated that the restrictions are “necessary safeguards against the exploitation of sensitive military operations.” Simmons explained that the policy was crafted after consultations with the Office of the Secretary of Defense’s (OSD) Office of Intelligence and Security. “The intent is not to suppress reporting, but to ensure that critical operational details remain secure,” she said.

Simmons also referenced the Pentagon’s “Transparency Initiative” and stated that the new policy would not affect “public briefings or the release of de‑classified information.” She suggested that reporters could instead use the Pentagon’s new “Media Access Portal” (https://mediaaccess.pentagon.mil) for pre‑submitting coverage plans and receiving rapid clearance.

Historical Context and Implications

The Pentagon’s relationship with the press has always been fraught with tension. In 2012, a joint press and defense committee created a “Media Access Charter” that promised limited but meaningful access to field operations. However, the charter’s effectiveness was curtailed by a series of 2014 policy changes that re‑imposed restrictions after several incidents of leaked classified material. These episodes created a precedent for the current situation.

The new restrictions have raised concerns among independent media outlets, such as the International Freedom of Expression Foundation (IFEX), which issued a statement warning that “press restrictions of this magnitude risk curtailing investigative journalism and reducing public accountability.” They further urged the Pentagon to consider a “multi‑stakeholder review” that includes representatives from the press, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) oversight committees, and civil‑liberties groups.

The Road Ahead

The Pentagon’s policy faces a gauntlet of scrutiny, from congressional oversight committees that have already requested a briefing on the new rules to advocacy groups demanding transparency. Meanwhile, the press corps has begun organizing a “Press Access Summit” scheduled for next month, where journalists will debate the balance between national security and press freedom.

Whether the Pentagon will revise its policy or stand by its claims of security necessity remains to be seen. However, the outcry from reporters and civil‑rights advocates underscores a deeper issue: in an era where misinformation can spread with a single tweet, maintaining an open and informed public through robust journalistic oversight is more critical than ever.