On Oct. 14 the Pentagon implemented new press control measures which led reporters from major news networks to hand in their security badges en masse. Major news outlets such as CNN, FOX, Reuters, Politico, CBS, NPR, New York Times and many others declined to sign the controversial press policy because they believed it would compromise their journalistic integrity.
Though the release itself states that “Nothing in this document requires you to waive any constitutional rights,” it also states that any information related to the Pentagon cannot be published until it is approved by an authorized official in order to “ safeguard classified national security information.”
In a post on X, @POLITICOPress said “The policy infringes on First Amendment protections and limits the ability to produce rigorous and transparent reporting,” and that they would continue to report on the government even without Pentagon access. This sentiment was shared by other news networks in similar announcements on X following the press corps disbandment.
“The whole point is that we are supposed to keep the government accountable, and we can’t really do that if we’re not allowed access and to write about what is happening… To have someone reading through the script, what’s the point? Then it is not journalism, it is just PR for the Pentagon.” -Dr. Samantha Peko, UNG Journalism Lecturer
The One America News Network, or OANN, was the only major news organization to sign on to the new press policy after conferring with their attorneys.
Michael Adams Sr., a UNG junior studying journalism shared, “I thought that [the new standards] were overdue, but a little heavy handed,” said Adams. “There have been many leaks, however if the data is nonclassified, it should be freely disseminated.” Adams said that if he was in the press corps, he would have stayed because although the new policy is “a somewhat curtailing of free speech… it is not a violation, in my opinion.”
The first amendment of the U.S. Constitution states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” However, Professor Hickman, who teaches the UNG Media Law classes and practices entertainment law says that “it is a bit of a misnomer” and that in practice, the first amendment enforces that “there will be as few laws as possible” restricting free speech.
