11 ms·
New York Times, AP, Newsmax and others say they won't sign new Pentagon rules
- lkey 1y agoIt's a great thing they are not backing down. Given how many institutions have complied in advance, we need as many exemplars of better behaviour as possible.
- etchalon 1y agoHow absolutely cowardly the "Department of War" seems to be.
- ChiMan 1y agoYou know the weakness of man from a mile away by the verbosity and volume of his "toughness."
- annexrichmond 1y ago[flagged]
- platevoltage 1y agoThe last ceasefire between Israel and Hamas was in January of this year, before he took office, but yes, he's a special boy for actually doing his job.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- throwawaysleep 1y agoAnd that historic peace deal in decades would be? The last ceasefire between Hamas and Israel was in 2021.
- pjc50 1y agoI'm sure the next one will be in 2027.
- moogly 1y agoIt was in January this year and was broken by Israel in March.
- annexrichmond 1y agoThis includes full Israeli withdrawal to a buffer zone, Rafah crossing reopening, and Hamas giving up weapons and control of Gaza, with US/Arab-funded rebuilding. If you don't understand the difference between now, and those events, then I can't help you.
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago> was aided by his "toughness", such as, you know, striking Iran Striking Iran didn't end hostilities in Gaza, Trump leaning on Egypt, Turkey and Qatar did [1]. (The Iran strikes might have worked because Hegseth was sidelined [2].) Hegseth is a wuss who couldn't cut it in the military. He's in place because he's loyal, probably compromised, and plays masculinity well on TV. [1] https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/a-coordinated-squeeze-play-forced-hamas-to-accept-a-deal-it-didnt-want-7753f9c8 https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/a-coordinated-squeeze-... [2] https://newrepublic.com/post/197005/trump-iran-plans-hegseth-gabbard https://newrepublic.com/post/197005/trump-iran-plans-hegseth...
- actionfromafar 1y agoA very kind of camp, drag masculinity.
- annexrichmond 1y agoI didn't say it directly ended, I said it was aided by. > "I think it really started when we took out the nuclear capability of Iran," Trump said, referring to the June strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites. "When you look at what they had, you couldn't have made this deal with someone sitting over there with a nuclear weapon over your head." [1] [1] https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-credits-iran-nuclear-strikes-kickstarting-israel-hamas-peace-deal https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-credits-iran-nuclear-...
- KumaBear 1y agoThe real question who signed it?
- afavour 1y agoOANN.
- jimt1234 1y agoWasn't OANN started by AT&T as a way to push propaganda favoring the corporation-friendly tax package in Trump's first term?
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago> Wasn't OANN started by AT&T as a way to push propaganda favoring the corporation-friendly tax package in Trump's first term? "AT&T has been a crucial source of funds flowing into OAN, providing tens of millions of dollars in revenue," while "ninety percent of OAN’s revenue came from a contract with AT&T-owned television platforms, including satellite broadcaster DirecTV, according to 2020 sworn testimony by an OAN accountant" [1]. That said, there is no evidence this was done "to push propaganda favoring the corporation-friendly tax package in Trump's first term.” Simpler: they chased Fox, Newsmax et al's dollars. [1] https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-oneamerica-att/ https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-onea...
- orochimaaru 1y agoAs an FCC regulated company AT&T is obligated to not discriminate in signing contracts. So AT&T (or the erstwhile DirecTV) cannot refuse OANN. It wasn’t started by AT&T.
- platevoltage 1y agoOANN might as well be a high school newspaper at this point.
- mulmen 1y ago
- afavour 1y ago> Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth reacted by posting the Times’ statement on X and adding a hand-waving emoji. > Hegseth also reposted a question from a follower who asked, “Is this because they can’t roam the Pentagon freely? Do they believe they deserve unrestricted access to a highly classified military installation under the First Amendment?” > Hegseth answered, “yes.” I know this is old man yelling at the clouds these days but good lord if we could have government officials that aren't terminally online...
- tombert 1y agoAll I want from politicians, and by this I mean literally all I want at this point, is my politicians to be smarter than me. That's really not that hard, I'm not that smart, this isn't an unrealistic bar for politicians to cross. I can say with some confidence that an alcoholic Fox News talk show host is not smarter than me.
- geeunits 1y agoThe unfortunate reality is that the smartest people avoid politics.
- generic92034 1y agoLately they also seem to avoid science, to some degree. So, what occupation do they choose, in these days?
- eep_social 1y agofinance and tech or wherever the money is best
- omnimus 1y agoI live in non english european country. One of our problems is that huge number of our politicians (including foreign affairs ministry etc.) can't speak english. Education is not bad here. You have to have pretty high level english to pass any university. I mean many bars wont give you a job without passing english interview. But if you want to do international politics its fine because politicians don't have any formal requirements. So next time you see EU parlament footage where people have speeches in their native language… it's not out of national pride or respect. It's simply because many of them couldn't do it otherwise.
- qgin 1y agoDidn't expect to see Newsman on that list
- platevoltage 1y agoThey believe the pendulum will swing the other way, which is honestly surprising.
- strathmeyer 1y ago[dead]
- dragonwriter 1y agoThe only notable outlet that has stated it does intend to sign the new rules is One America News Network, the network for people that think that Fox News has excessive left-wing bias.
- sour-taste 1y agoCan they sue, and if they do are they likely to win? My laymans gut feeling is they will lose because the constitution says nothing about the government being required to provide press access to facilities. However, if they allow access to one organization but not another seems there could be an argument that they're policing speech? Would be great to hear a more informed take.
- fnordpiglet 1y agoSmarter, they just dont cover the propaganda from inside, they dig the truth from those inside. The media has been too lazy for too long printing press release from the government. This government has nothing to say but propaganda - I don’t even bother reading the government quotes any more. They are content free and self aggrandizing at a level of absurdity that would put North Korea to shame. There have been governments hostile to journalists in the past, and those are the governments with the most to lose when journalists dig into their work. I look forward to the investigative journalism of the next three years.
- generic92034 1y ago> I look forward to the investigative journalism of the next three years. So, who is owning the media publishing the investigative journalism? Will they risk shaking the grass, considering the powers that be?
- djkoolaide 1y ago404 Media is a great place to start.
- yupyupyups 1y agopaywalled
- robin_reala 1y ago
- 4ndrewl 1y agoEconomically this makes sense. Those companies that sign are relegated to essentially just republishing press releases, so there's little value in employing someone just to do that.
- EdwardDiego 1y ago[flagged]
- cosmicgadget 1y ago> Do they believe they deserve unrestricted access to a highly classified military installation under the First Amendment? Sounds like a real question from a real person.
- AdamN 1y agoNobody has unrestricted access right now so not sure what they're saying.
- cosmicgadget 1y ago[flagged]
- classified 1y agoFrom TFA: Hegseth also reposted a question from a follower who asked, “Is this because they can’t roam the Pentagon freely? Do they believe they deserve unrestricted access to a highly classified military installation under the First Amendment?” Hegseth answered, “yes.” Reporters say neither of those assertions is true.
- 0xEF 1y agoThis is the type of dialogue we can continue to expect from people whose understanding of government and military operations comes from oorah films and delusions of grandeur.
- classified 1y agoThe quantity and intensity of stupidity exhibited in the linked tweet thread is truly exasperating. They want freedom of speech for themselves and a neutered press.
- bilekas 1y agoIt honestly feels like they're trying to speedrun autocracy, but it's not clear to me the game plan here. Assuming the voting and election situation doesn't change, they won't be in office forever, possibly even the next term. They've just weakened oversight and standards of decency that surely they will be crying about later. To be honest it's exhausting just listening to the adults supposedly running the strongest country in the world like a Twitter trolling session.
- esseph 1y agoDominion voting machines, the company falsely accused of rigging the election that also lead to the court case that got Tucker fired from Fox, were just acquired by a (R). This was to keep the elections Fair and Balanced.
- actionfromafar 1y ago"Fair and balanced" in the same way some animals are more equal than others? I could see that. Was this ever debunked by the way? https://michaeldsellers.substack.com/p/new-starlink-election-fraud-claims https://michaeldsellers.substack.com/p/new-starlink-election...
- dredmorbius 1y agoThe phrase was quoted with obvious and dripping irony.
- inemesitaffia 1y agoNo need for debunking. Just ask anyone with a CCNP or equivalent Makes absolutely no sense
- actionfromafar 1y agoI don't think you can debunk this with a generic CCNP check. The concern is hacking, not normal network configurations. The Uninterruptible power supply (UPS) provider is Palantir. Tabulator Machine <- usb/serial -> UPS <- cell connection -> Internet. Not uncommon to run SNMP on a UPS either. SNMP is an unloved pile of bugs: https://arstechnica.com/security/2025/09/as-many-as-2-million-cisco-devices-affected-by-actively-exploited-0-day/ https://arstechnica.com/security/2025/09/as-many-as-2-millio... I'm not saying anything nefarious actually happened. But as soon as you connect devices to the net in any way you are in deep water, especially when one or more of your vendors may be one of your threat actors. Complicated hacks are not common, but possible, especially when the stakes are high and competent people are on the task. Stuxnet development started 20 years ago - and the target was even airgapped, which didn't help the target in the end.
- h33t-l4x0r 1y agoI feel like the GOP will eventually just have their own news media wing that will have exclusives to all their pressers. (And no, it won't be Fox News). They'll call it something similar to TruthSocial / Pravda. It's from the old Soviet playbook.
- piker 1y agoI had understood that Newsmax was part of that hypothetical system. Interesting they’re even taking a stand here.
- Muromec 1y agoPravda is a generic name for newspapers, like "Times" is in Anglophone workd. Ketamine abuser even tried to buy pravda.com, but you all was spared coz its used by Ukraian Pravda. Which is (was) not very aligned with the establishent to say the least.
- yencabulator 1y agoBoth meanings can be true at the same time. It's literally the word "truth" and used by many papers, but it's also the specific official newspaper of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pravda https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pravda https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pravda_(disambiguation) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pravda_(disambiguation)
- gdulli 1y agoLook up "Jeff Gannon talon news"
- kwar13 1y agoAll out assault on the press.
- themafia 1y agoIt's an assault on the truth and on the citizens. They clearly thought they could just buy the press. This even shows.. they were mostly correct in their assessment.
- pjc50 1y agoLarge sections of the press actively supported this, at the behest of their owners: https://www.npr.org/2024/10/28/nx-s1-5168416/washington-post-bezos-endorsement-president-cancellations-resignations https://www.npr.org/2024/10/28/nx-s1-5168416/washington-post... (I keep joking that other countries have state controlled media, but in the West we have media-controlled states)
- calvinmorrison 1y agothe press, the proxy of the elite and wealthy have waged an all out war on americans for decades. They've long lost their status as a 4th pillar of government and instead are complicit in a long list of crimes. by "The Press" we're not talking about newswriters but organizations who are large, evil, and morally bankrupt. Anyone is free to start up a paper and write what they please
- tremon 1y agoGreat example of Newspeak you have there. "the press, the proxy of the elite and wealthy" will have no problem signing this, so this is not an attack on them. You even acknowledge this by saying > by "The Press" we're not talking about newswriters but organizations who are large, evil, and morally bankrupt So the logical conclusion must be that the GP meant something else than your self-serving redefinition. Yet, you still choose to attack the post as if it is completely wrong, and the attack on the press is fully justified?
- 1y ago
- tdeck 1y agoThis will likely be an unpopular opinion, but American press outlets could stand to be a little less close to the Pentagon. They were given this access for a reason that was useful to the DoD / war department, which is something the Trump administration seems not to understand.
- thunderbong 1y agohttps://archive.is/1PEdK https://archive.is/1PEdK
- ap99 1y ago[flagged]
- simonw 1y agoNo. From https://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/new-policy-access-pentagon-journalists-trump-administration-odds-126056956 https://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/new-policy-access-... > The new policy says that Defense Department information “must be approved for public release by an appropriate authorizing official before it is released, even if unclassified.”
- arthurofbabylon 1y ago> "That's the rule, right?" Seriously? The compulsion towards obsequiousness is incredible. Some members of our public will twist themselves into knots just to obey, even when they are not asked. (I genuinely wonder if the current bout of obsessive political obedience is a fetish.)
- platevoltage 1y agoWe should only know what the government wants us to know. That’s what you want, right?
- perching_aix 1y ago> Chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said (...) "This has caused reporters to have a full blown meltdown, crying victim online." Interesting use of language... seems like the mask is coming off everywhere now, not just where I live (Hungary). I've been intentionally skipping on a lot of our local political reporting, so I was really quite surprised to see recently how lowbrow the language used by politicians, specifically those in power, has gotten these days. Especially how flagrant they are about it too. This is a very meta, and to many I'm sure trivial, thing to take issue with, yes, but if those in authority are this unashamedly drunk on power, and look down on those they rule over so openly, I'd really question how fit they are to represent people's collective best interest.
- 4ggr0 1y ago[flagged]
- ddddang 1y ago[dead]
- wat10000 1y agoA lot of people love this. They want to wield power to hurt people they don’t like. Watching others they perceive as being on “their side” do it serves as a substitute.
- cindyllm 1y ago[dead]
- gaindustries 1y ago[flagged]
- x3n0ph3n3 1y agoNot everyone wants a better society, nor agrees on what a better society even looks like. It's a common mistake to believe your adversary is just like you, but terribly confused.
- crises-luff-6b 1y agoAbout effing time! Anyone else have a security clearance? It's ridiculous that on the front page of literally every major newspaper there are least a handful of examples of felonious leaks of literally Confidential military intelligence from "unnamed sources". Literally each instance of that is a potential & likely felony. Those leakers are committing actual crimes. People here need a healthy dose of reality.
- platevoltage 1y agoWe have a right to know what our tax money is being used for.
- aristofun 1y agoTo be fair modern media companies (virtually every single one of them) has long been a weapon in someone’s hands. Only idiot these days really goes to bbc or whatever your acronym of choice for “the truth”. They all push some sort of agenda down our throats and already lick ass to some authority or sponsor. What difference does it make if they got just +1 little constraint.
- toomim 1y agoWhy are we reading this from the AP-- clearly a member of the conflict --instead of a neutral party? Does anyone have a neutral source?
- aredox 1y agoThis is a reporting of the facts, not an opinion piece.
- platevoltage 1y agoYou’ve got to be kidding. Standing up to the president automatically makes you a biased source?
- shadowtree 1y ago[flagged]
- vlucas 1y agoDoes anyone have a link to the actual rules/document they are asked to sign? I clicked on the "new rules" link in the article linked here, and it doesn't actually show all the rules. While it's nice to see the reaction from one side, I'd like to be able to balance that against the actual text of the document myself.
- ndiddy 1y agoHere: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/09/20/us/pentagon-press-restrictions.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/09/20/us/pentagon-p... The most draconian new rule is that it bars the press from reporting any information unless they get it approved for public release by an appropriate authorizing official. This would basically turn the press into a PR mouthpiece for the Dept of War.
- dragonwriter 1y agoThe Department of Defense is the legal name. The Department of War is a propaganda nickname.
- nrds 1y ago[flagged]
- dragonwriter 1y agoThe Gulf of Mexico/America/etc. is not a creation of law, the Department of Defense is.
- asacrowflies 1y agoFar as I can tell that law has no real jurisdiction over that piece of geography. To steelman you stupid point... Only Americans should be calling it that lol.
- wasabi991011 1y agoGulf of Mexico is the common name, used extensively by all types of people since the 17th century. The idea that this is a propaganda nickname is so absurd that I can only consider it a bold faced lie.
- mothballed 1y agoIf all they can parrot is the company line there's no point in having more than one press agency show up. Just incorporate "propaganda inc" have them show up, then parrot the company line and no one else need bother show up. The other reporters can then spin that.
- FilosofumRex 1y agoThis is a ruse and a manufactured 'much to do about nothing"... the real source of power in America is the CIA & associated Think Tanks and Wall Street law firms - not the Pentagon, especially as far as domestic policy is concerned. Pentagon and the Media are owned and controlled by the same military-industrial complex and always agree to disagree with each other in public.