Sunday, October 19, 2025
Sunday, October 19, 2025
(Editor’s note: Tony Bertuca, the author of this piece, has been a credentialed member of the Pentagon press corps for 15 years and will be impacted by this new policy.)
Dozens of news outlets, including Inside Defense, are rejecting a new Pentagon policy they say bars journalists from seeking or obtaining information not explicitly provided by the Defense Department, resulting in the revocation of press access.
Statements of rejection from various media organizations began lighting up social media on Tuesday afternoon, hours before a Pentagon deadline requiring journalists to sign on to the new press access policy.
Fox News -- the former employer of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth -- along with ABC, CBS and NBC, released a joint statement on their decision.
“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,” they wrote. “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.”
A host of other media outlets have also refused to sign off on the new policy, which has been condemned by press advocacy organizations including the Committee to Protect Journalists, the National Press Club and the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press.
At present, the conservative cable channel One America News Network appears to be the only outlet publicly saying it will honor the new policy.
Hegseth, speaking at the White House alongside President Trump, defended the new media regulations.
“It’s commonsense stuff, Mr. President,” he said. “We’re trying to make sure national security is respected, and we’re proud of the policy.”
Trump said he supported the policy.
“[I]t bothers me to have soldiers and, even, you know, high-ranking generals walking around with you guys on their sleeve asking -- because they can make a mistake, and a mistake can be tragic,” he told a reporter.
Hegseth, meanwhile, is under investigation by the Pentagon inspector general for his role in the potential leak of classified information related to the “Signalgate” controversy.
Hegseth responded Monday on X to several media statements with a waving hand emoji, misstating the extent of the new policy.
“Here is @DeptofWar press credentialing FOR DUMMIES,” he wrote. “Press no longer roams free. Press must wear visible badge. Credentialed press no longer permitted to solicit criminal acts. DONE.”
Tom Bowman, a Pentagon correspondent for NPR, wrote an opinion piece on the policy.
“Did I as a reporter solicit information? Of course. It's called journalism: finding out what's really going on behind the scenes and not accepting wholesale what any government or administration says,” he wrote.
Meanwhile, the Pentagon Press Association released a statement saying there “is no reason for the Pentagon to require reporters to sign a new document.”
“For decades, reporters seeking a badge to work inside the Pentagon simply signed a single-page form outlining certain access limits,” the PPA said. “The new 21-page document adds extensive legal claims, laying out unprecedented contentions about what is and is not acceptable newsgathering and gagging Defense Department employees, from the highest official to the lowest junior officer in the field, from providing information to a reporter without permission.”
While the PPA acknowledged the Pentagon “certainly has the right to make its own policies, within the constraints of the law,” the group said there is no need “to require reporters to affirm their understanding of vague, likely unconstitutional policies as a precondition to reporting from Pentagon facilities.”
Additionally, the PPA said the Pentagon’s required acknowledgement “demands reporters to express an ‘understanding’ that harm inevitably flows from the disclosure of unauthorized information, classified or not -- something everyone involved knows to be untrue.”