I previously criticized the new Pentagon policies for media organizations. While the Trump Administration made some changes, the rules remained unduly restrictive and unprecedented. As a result, virtually every news organization, including Fox News, refused to sign the agreements at the deadline — a decision that I strongly support.
The changes will effectively bar most media from the Pentagon, undermining the department’s ability to work with reporters to ensure accurate reporting on military operations.
The Pentagon Press Association objected last week that a revised policy still seeks to prohibit journalists from soliciting unauthorized information in addition to accessing it. It said that the rules appeared to be “designed to stifle a free press and potentially expose us to prosecution for simply doing our jobs.”
The PPA added that the revised policy “conveys an unprecedented message of intimidation to everyone within the DoD, warning against any unapproved interactions with the press and even suggesting it’s criminal to speak without express permission – which plainly, it is not”.
The relationship with the press can be strained at times, and tensions with the Trump Administration are notoriously high. However, this is a “beat” that requires close and ongoing communications to keep the media (and the public) fully informed of military policies and programs.
The organizations refusing to sign include outlets that are viewed as supportive of the Trump Administration with large conservative audiences.
Many of us have joined the Trump Administration in criticizing the bias of most media outlets. Indeed, the public reflects the same criticism in polling with the media at record lows of public trust. However, this move is gratuitous and self-defeating.
Despite the anger at the media and the need for serious reforms in many outlets, we need to protect the free press, which plays a critical role in our constitutional system.
Thus far, only One America News Network has agreed to the new regulations.
As I stated earlier, I am dubious about possible legal challenges over access to the Pentagon. Other agencies such as the CIA do not allow general access to the media. The Administration, in my view, has the advantage in any challenges over such rules.
Media Companies Refuse to Sign New Pentagon Media Rules
Meh. Americans refuse to sign on to media companies fake news programs.
JD Vance had it right when he upbraided George Stephanopolous, the same George Stephanopoulos of the infamous Real Estate Loan Controversy because of his affiliation with Bill Clinton
see
George Stephanopoulos – Real Estate Loan Controversy
https://www.liquisearch.com/george_stephanopoulos/real_estate_loan_controversy
Why are they in there at all? We are leaking information all over the place, and we also let “friendly” spies in? Is Comey invited, too?
For the benefit of all, here is a link to the actual Pentagon memo:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/09/20/us/pentagon-press-restrictions.html
Here is a link to the same info, but NO PAYWALL:
https://static.poder360.com.br/2025/09/Pentagono-nova-regra-midia-20-set-2025.pdf
Ty. The NYT effectively banned me at the beginning of the Ukraine conflict .. . for asking too many questions.
I wouldn’t sign it.
It’s like a DoW NDA bootcamp for journalists – aka Pentagon correspondents – who have to the gall to even question the Pentagon, the DoW, president Trump and the Virgin Mary herself. .. and refuse to print the retraction.
*do you believe in the Virgin Mary?
Vice President JD Vance faulted “scumbag” reporters for leaking group chat text messages from leaders of Young Republican groups that praised Adolf Hitler, used the N-word, called black people monkeys, joked about putting political opponents in gas chambers, and praised rape, saying rape is epic.
Herein lies the problem.
Reporters did not “leak” the information as Vance falsely claims.
Someone in the Young Republican group chat was so concerned about the vile comments that they passed the information to reporters who simply reported a factual story.
The only “leaking” was done by someone in the chat group.
The only “scumbags” are the Young Republicans in the group chat.
However, Vance sees fit to attack the reporters who simply reported a factual story.
What he didn’t do is deny the story, so we can safely assume it is true.
So as far as Vance is concerned, reporters exercising their First Amendment rights are “leaking scumbags”.
Pretty much sums up the Trump administration’s total lack of respect and understanding of the Constitution.
Yeah george.. Just lies and nothing more. Just bore us and we move on from these stupid comments
Can we obtain some of Hillary, Bill, Obongo, and the Autopen’s most private communications?
That might be interesting.
Wasn’t it Obongo who hid behind a pseudonymous email account to mishandle classified information with Hills?
That could be worse than cursing and calling people names.
And what did Hills call everyone the night she learned about Monica Lewinsky?
Given the media approval level is at historic lows … their screams of “free speech” or really anything else is laughable. The media has dug a deep hole and that is where they should stay, at the bottom of the hole they dug.
Media approval is low because MAGAs attack them. This policy is another way for MAGAs to attack the media.
Biden’s Marxist Birthing Boyz claim MAGA shouldn’t call their media lying dishonest corrupt clowns despite the fact the world knows the felonious Russia Dossier was 100% a criminal Clinton/Obama creation.
NOT FAIR!!!!! How DARE they point out what the Democrat-Mainstream Media Propaganda Complex is!
Prof. Turley,
You rail about the new press policies, but you do not actually cite what those policies are or the problems with those policies.
I can not see how the Pentagon can impose on the press corp rules that violate the first amendment – and atleast one poster above actually cites the new policy as acknowledging exactly that.
Regardless, your article asks me to get offended because Trump’s DOJ is trying to reign in the first amendment rights of journalists.
One of the major problems I have with pretty much ALL left wing nut journalism is that those journalists do EXACTLY as you are doing now – they attack something TELLING us what we must beleive and feel without actually SHOWING us the ACTUAL source of the offense.
Atleast one poster here states that the new press policy explicitly states that those who sign on to it retain ALL their first amendment rights.
If that is correct – then YOUR article is “much ado about nothing”, a “tempest in a tea pot”.
Cite? “seeks to prohibit journalists from soliciting unauthorized information in addition to accessing it.” Policy enough?
You got an education there buddy? Don’t seem it.
Don’t seem to me like you understand that the press policy covers about 17 pages or so. There is a lot more than “seeks to prohibit journalists from soliciting unauthorized information in addition to accessing it.” Here, let me EDUCATE you! You can read the whole memorandum here. I went ahead and subscribed for $1 per week, so that I could read it. Say, “Thank you!”
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/09/20/us/pentagon-press-restrictions.html
Thank you, Floyd.
“ALL left wing nut journalism is that those journalists do EXACTLY as you are doing now – they attack something TELLING us what we must believe and feel without actually SHOWING us the ACTUAL source of the offense”. You need to watch less Fox News. Left wing media is very good at telling people why something is offensive, illegal, or dangerous.
And a document that infringes on rights does not magically get a pass because says it does not infringe in rights.
John, none so blind as those who refuse to see.
“I can not see how the Pentagon can impose on the press corp rules that violate the first amendment ”
If a reporter does anything Hegseth doesn’t like after signing this, Hegseth revokes the press pass.
It clearly states that Department of War (sic) DoW information must be approved by an authorizing individual for publication, even if it is unclassified. This is a violation of the Freedom of the Press guarantee in the US Constitution.
Part of the reason for this is that the Trump administration leaks like a sieve and it makes them look bad when they include members of the press when using illegal side-channel apps to discuss classified war plans and the press then reports on the leak and the contents of the leak after the value of the information has evaporated.
Which page of https://static.poder360.com.br/2025/09/Pentagono-nova-regra-midia-20-set-2025.pdf mentions the First Amendment?
“It clearly states that Department of War (sic) DoW information must be approved by an authorizing individual for publication, even if it is unclassified. This is a violation of the Freedom of the Press guarantee in the US Constitution.”
You want to take a second chance at making a rational, legitimate argument that a standing order for all military personnel to not discuss events, policies, etc with journalists unless authorized to do so and violates the First Amendment rights of every person in uniform? The USMCJ is unconstitutional?
So it’s constitutional to have laws against soliciting bribes, soliciting prostitution, etc… but not illegal for journalists to solicit U.S.C. and USMCJ criminal offences from the taxpayers’ employees because the First Amendment authorizes journalists to do that?
You haven’t made that case yet, Skippy.
Pursuant to Article I., Section. 8. of the US Constitution: “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States…” (emphasis added). Pursuant to the First Amendment, “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…” (emphasis added). Based upon 238 years (not 250 as popularly depicted; the Constitution is the founding document) of our constitutional America, failure of the press to keep the American public well informed has resulted time and again in clandestine illegal military missions ultimately resulting in the guerrilla (as opposed to “terrorist” attacks of “9/11”) with at least three unheeded prior warnings by Middle East nations to quit meddling in their affairs (e.g., the oil embargo of 1973, the truck bomb attacks on the Marine barracks in Beirut in 1983 and the first, truck bomb, attack on the WTC in 1993) of the 9/11 attacks on the home bases of the US (as opposed to “American”) money, power and war mongers. Current events in the Trump misadministration dictate the necessity of the press having access to all but purely defensive secrets, if even those. For a start, there is no constitutional rationale for a “Department of War” and a globally threatening US posture; ‘peace through wisdom;’ res ipsa loquitur.
So true. The press failed to tell America about the Mossad operation to insinuate itself into Osama Bin Laden’s airliner plan and ensure its success by insinuating itself into the elevator refurbishment plan of the Twin Towers in order to load them with charges in the elevator shafts to effect a controlled demolition for the purpose of placing the full might of America squarely in the Middle East, obviously, on the side of Israel.
How has Israel benefited since 9/11?
Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth https://www.ae911truth.org/
Regarding my comments above yours, I still doubt your “9/11 Truth.” At fifty-seven years of age on “9/11” while not an expert (of any kind), I was already so tuned-in to illegal American misadventures in the Middle East and elsewhere that the first thought that crossed my mind that morning when hearing of it on live radio was: “They’ve attacked the home bases of the money, power and war mongers (a/k/a the unruly rich, just added).” The undersize bolt explanation of the collapsing towers I saw on PBS still makes good sense to me. And, in consideration of the vibrations and shocks that must have been generated by the two towers collapsing, I think it’s reasonable to expect neighboring buildings to also collapse. Any domestic conspiracy was probably only to take unfair advantage of a tragic situation that could have been avoided in the first place, by America being a good neighbor and not just an extremist capitalist trading partner. Sadly, now we have President Trump blaming Venezuela for drug use and deaths instigated by our own industrious FDA; a half century of toxic chronic disease causing food additive approvals; such slow learners, in the absence of thorough investigative reporting. Charles G. Shaver
There it is….IT’S THE FILTHY JEWZ!!!!
Not a single one of you pathetic clowns has even the most basic understanding of just how much tearing out/replacing it would take to put preliminary charges in the Twin Towers – that are occupied 24/7.
Got any idea how long it takes drywall mud, paint, etc to dry after putting holes in the walls, you clowns?
Mainstream media: Spare us the pious outrage over the Pentagon press corps. You stood by passively as narratives were meticulously shaped, data cherry-picked, studies twisted, and outright fabrications peddled to the public by those vaunted “watchdogs” and self-proclaimed fourth estate. Since 2016, and well into the first term, you’ve bent obligingly to the DNC’s whims—via dubious “fact-checkers,” the brazen suppression of the Biden laptop story, the glossing over of Biden family improprieties, and even the push for a “Ministry of Truth.” And now, you mount your high horse of free press and First Amendment sanctity, merely because the game of selective storytelling is finally drawing to a close? How predictably theatrical.
Dear Prof Turley,
Yeah. If I had to choose between a government without corporate media or the corporate media without a government .. . in this instance, I would not hesitate to choose res ipsa loquitur.
So, Americans fund the Pentagon to the tune of $1 trillion no questions asked? (tbh, the Pentagon has never passed an audit so we don’t know how much money they actually spend, nor, for the most part, what they spend it on.)
We do know Sec. of War Hegseth has effectively suspended the ‘stupid rules of engagement’ and President Trump has directed he use dangerous American cities as ‘training grounds’ for the U.S. armed forces and the raging ‘war within’.
What could go wrong?
*in any case, those who would sacrifice liberty for security . .. will get neither.
“We do know Sec. of War Hegseth has effectively suspended the ‘stupid rules of engagement’ and President Trump has directed he use dangerous American cities as ‘training grounds’ for the U.S. armed forces and the raging ‘war within’. What could go wrong?”
OM!!!! BBBBUUUTTTT…. MUH TRUMP!!!!! Fewer black Americans murdered, hundreds more not being raped, robbed, violently assaulted – and hundreds of criminal Illegal Aliens deported! That’s what’s wrong with this!
I wonder why dgsnowden believes it is a terrible thing that murder and other violent crime rates have sharply decreased where Trump sent the military? It seems pretty Confederate Democrat to mourn because not as many of those Darkies are being murdered, robbed, assaulted.
In the meantime, if dgsnowden can take a moment away from his latest Midol Moment… exactly how many black clad Antifa terrorists and assorted other Democrat thugs and gangsters have even been arrested – much less shot – by the US troops already in those cities? 100? 10? 1? Is the number ZERO – because what they’re specifically doing is protecting federal taxpayer assets and employees?
And who lost what specific liberty in those cities, deprived of that liberty by those troops?
Aid to the civil power training has been around for a long, long time in the military, as dgsnowden remembers from his own lengthy military career?
*Your hysteria gave you away when tried your lie that nobody questions the military budget “So, Americans fund the Pentagon to the tune of $1 trillion no questions asked?”.
That’s a Biden level pathetic lie – both sides are constantly questioning one thing or the other of the military budget.
The last section of the updated policies states:
“Nothing in this document require you to waive Constitutional rights. This in-brief constitutes a description of DoW policies.”
Then the acknowledgement which journalists seeking credentials states;
“I have received, read, and understand the “Pentagon Reservation In-brief for Media Members,” with Appendices A-E, including Appendix A, which addresses the standard and procedures for denying, revoking, or not renewing a PFAC. The in-brief describes DoW policies and procedures. My signature represents my acknowledgement and understanding of such DoW policies and procedures, even if I do not necessarily agree with such policies and procedures. Signing this acknowledge any rights i may have under the law.”
Can someone explain why this isn’t reasonable?
Journalistic integrity is compromised. If you were a journalist, you would know that.
The Journalistic integrity you speak of doesn’t exist anymore.
Weird! In the Democrat Borg, soliciting federal troops and employees to commit felonies and violate the USCMJ is now considered “journalistic integrity”.
If you were a communist Democrat, you’d actually believe that’s what journalistic integrity looks like: ink stained criminal wretches.
I can’t believe President Trump hasn’t already given Professor Turley his private phone number so he could call the POTUS and advise him on anything 1A related.
Also, it seems like Professor Turley could get Pete Hegseth’s private number from someone at FOX, unless he’s had it changed, to see if Pete agrees and, if not, why.
There’s no point in giving the Hitler/Nazi/oligarchy conspiracy theorists any crumbs upon which to speculate.
Nowhere in the Constitution is the media guaranteed the right to access to ANY government entity. I spent 12 years in the military during the Vietnam Era and have been writing the military for decades. Media NEVER gets anything right when reporting on anything involving the military (or anything else.)
Heck try to just walk into Boeing and see if you just see what ever.
I found the exact document:
https://www.rcfp.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/2025-10-06-Revised-Pentagon-press-access-in-brief.pdf
Freedom of the press is a wonderful thing, but neither the public nor the press is entitled to untrammeled access to information about military operations. If they don’t want to play by the rules, it is the Pentagon’s prerogative to feed all information through the War Department’s Public Affairs Office.
Considering we have had damaging leaks to press, it seems the Pentagon leadership has taken some of the following steps (among others, presumably, which we haven’t seen, to my knowledge):\
1. **Information Disclosure Rule**
– “Information must be approved for public release by an appropriate authorizing official before it is released, even if it is unclassified.”
2. **Security Risk and Credential Revocation**
– “A determination that an individual poses a security risk may be based on the unauthorized access, attempted unauthorized access, or unauthorized disclosure of CNSI [Controlled Unclassified Information] or CUI [Controlled Unclassified Information]… An initial determination of a security or safety risk may result in an immediate suspension of Pentagon access.”
3. **Physical Access Restrictions**
– “News media are not authorized to be anywhere on the 5th Floor, 4th Floor, 3rd Floor, Basement, or Mezzanine levels… at any time without an escort from an authorized DoW [Department of War] official.”
As for 1 – this does seem problematic and unnecessarily restrictive for unclassified information – for classified, an argument for this could be made. However, would we know about the torture had this rue been in place?
2- If the criteria are objective and clearly outlined and followed, this seems completely reasonable to me. What am I missing?
3- I see no problem with this. Can’t sources meet press elsewhere in the building.
Overall why can’t press folks meet with Pentagon folks outside of the building?
My overarching concern is not that press will be required to have name tags, credentials, sign in and out, etc, or that they can’t access super secret and sensitive areas – I think those rules are reasonable and prudent. The onus needs to be squarely on those WOrkinG at the Pentagon – military AND civilian,
investigating leaks, and having immediate and sever consequences for unauthorized leaks, up to and including immediate firing.
I view this from the military perspective, so if press folks would please weigh in, I would appreciate it. Also, if you can find the specific rule and guidelines, I’d appreciate that link too.
I suspect that rule #1 will be widely honored in the breach in short order as whomever the designated “authorizing officials” are become inundated with voluminous trivia…
How do you feel bad for a group that sold its soul to the left? Yet, a free press means a free press. Handcuffing them is not the answer from the left or right. I do not blame the refusal to sign.
Now if we can only get the press to neutrally report the news and leave the opinions to the editorial page, maybe they can start to rebuild trust with the populace.
Did you see the above link to the actual document and the quotes I posted? Does reading these change your view at all?
I don’t blame the press if they think they have any remaining credibility that will get the public they have deceived for so long and so hard to back them because they have given the military no reason to do this.
And I don’t blame the military for restricting that press’s open access to solicit the commission of felonies and violations of the USMCJ from the federal employees in and out of uniform in the Pentagon.
WAR is not a shouting match between Military complex sycophants aired on Sunday morning Network channels.
It is a ground battle of Human attrition, that impacts the lives of everyone surrounding it.
COL Scott M. Armen, M.D. U.S. Army Trauma Surgeon
U.S. Army Medical Recruiting Brigade
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-LdTvS_lpU
The work of a trauma surgeon in Camp Bastion, Afghanistan
[Link] youtube.com/watch?v=40Tx7Knzatk
Inside Camp Bastion’s Field Hospital | Doctors And Nurses At War
[Link] youtube.com/watch?v=iK1zS28eQlI
A Medic’s Work in Afghanistan Is Never Done
[Link] youtube.com/watch?v=9VeSCXKonCc
M*A*S*H: Bringing Surgery to the Soldier
[Link] youtube.com/watch?v=a678CTUsxCI
If the President can’t bring peace between the Euro-Asian States (The Ukrainian-Russo War) an escalation will happen drawing in the U.S..
Putting Our Forces in the path of War. Wherefore the Press is being ‘managed’:
1. So that negotiations can be deliberated without misguided (disinformation) media interference.
2. In the event that an impasse leads to escalation the Narrative of the U.S. basis will be in place unadulterated.
These are days are the critical moments before war, Be Prepared.
There is no legitimate US national interest served by expending our money or blood to preserve the gerrymandered and idiosyncratic borders of present day Ukraine. There is very little more (I wouldn’t debate a claim of “none”) legitimate US national interest served in propping up the EU or its member states, especially since for the past decade (or two) those members have made it their policy to undermine our legitimate interests at every turn and opportunity.
“There is no legitimate US national interest served by expending our money or blood to preserve the gerrymandered and idiosyncratic borders of present day Ukraine.”
What did we offer Ukraine in exchange for them surrendering those 3300 nukes and delivery systems they had. At the time, Ukraine could have turned our desperate pleas and offers down and looked for buyers of some of those nukes in North Korea, the Middle East, etc. Could have just sold a few for billions in cash, in oil, arms, etc and kept the majority still pointed at Russia.
We offered them old blankets and rations and they accepted that offer and then we delivered? Or perhaps some Patriot missiles to continue fighting alone with by the next president. That was more valuable than selling some nukes for hard cash and/or commodities?
What did we offer Ukraine in our legitimate US national interest that got them to agree to turn all those nukes over instead of selling some of them – which was what we feared they would do?
That was OUR deal, BTW – not the European Union’s, who we know say should be responsible for the aftermath once we had ensured Ukraine had no cards against Russia.
I think it was something more valuable than old blankets, some weapons and billions in cash they could have gotten by selling nukes.
I disagree with a whole premise of your argument! The press has plenty of freedom. They can get their information from authorized sources. President Trump, Secretary of Defense Hegseth, and a limited number of officials should be there only source for news.
Why shouldn’t the military be run like a normal business? You can allow some low-level soldier who likely doesn’t have all the information or could be giving out protected information to talk to the press. That’s common sense!
Who could Sorry, trust the whores in the media?
The commenters are focused on protecting classified info, but this is much larger than that. It covers any information that is not officially released.