New Press Rules in the Pentagon

[BomSquad]

As you are probably aware of by this point, the US DoW (Department of War) issued a memorandum about new press rules (pledge) for media outlets with a presence in the Pentagon. 

All but 15 news organizations (or freelance reporters) chose to walk out instead of signing the new pledge. It's my understanding that the signature was only to acknowledge they read and understand the rules, similar to signing an employee handbook when you start a new job. 

Defense Secretary Hegseth requires new 'pledge' for reporters at the Pentagon

There are a few things I'd like to say about this, but I have to plead some ignorance on the subject because I cannot seem to find a copy of the actual memorandum. I have found scores of articles talking about the memorandum, but so far none have actually chosen to publish or link to the actual full text of the memorandum. This could be due to my lack of skill in digging up the information, but that left me with another question.

Was the plethora of articles describing this memorandum intentionally done to muddy the waters? In other words, was the internet flooded with these articles to hide the actual memorandum from coming up in search results (that's assuming it is actually available online, which I would be surprised if it weren't)?

So far I've found that the original memorandum was 17 pages long, but none of the articles I've read are more than one or two pages and only mention a paragraph or two from the memo. Now I'm sure they are trying to be brief, especially in today's short attention span market, but you would think a simple link to the original memorandum could have been included.

Without the original text of the memorandum, we have ONLY the media to tell us what it said and their interpretation of the memorandum is reported as FACT, whereas if the full text were available, other conclusions might be made (or their conclusions could be confirmed).

With the "tik tokification" of the news cycle, the vast majority of media consumers do not take the time to verify that the news media's reporting is what is actually happening. They assume the news they are spoon fed by the media is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, whereas it is mostly opinion, half truths and barely disguised propaganda (at worst).

[David64]

They're complaining that they can no longer just wander through one of the most secure buildings on the planet.

I wonder if they'd think it's ok for someone to wander through their kids' schools without being buzzed in and escorted ? 

FFS.

[CriticalStinker]

They're complaining that they can no longer just wander through one of the most secure buildings on the planet.

I wonder if they'd think it's ok for someone to wander through their kids' schools without being buzzed in and escorted ? 

FFS.

I don’t think that’s one of the major complaints. Also, is there evidence that was taking place? I imagine like most secure spaces there are a lot of keycard doors. Not like journalists can just go wherever they want in there.

More curious to me is the timing as we increase our footing outside of Venezuela.

[David64]

I don’t think that’s one of the major complaints. Also, is there evidence that was taking place? I imagine like most secure spaces there are a lot of keycard doors. Not like journalists can just go wherever they want in there.

More curious to me is the timing as we increase our footing outside of Venezuela.

Op said there are 17 pages, but these are the only 2 I can find.

https://media.defense.gov/2025/May/23/20...NTAGON.PDF

[Vermilion]

MEMORANDUM FOR SENIOR PENTAGON LEADERSHIP
SUBJECT: Implementation of New Media In-brief
The attached documents implement the Secretary of War memorandum, "Updated
Physical Control Measures for Press/Media Access Within the Pentagon,"

https://www.rcfp.org/wp-content/uploads/...-brief.pdf

[UltraBudgie]

Op said there are 17 pages, but these are the only 2 I can find.

https://media.defense.gov/2025/May/23/20...NTAGON.PDF

Yes, Vermillion got the revised memo, here's the original 17-page one:
https://static.poder360.com.br/2025/09/P...t-2025.pdf

[BomSquad]

I don’t think that’s one of the major complaints. Also, is there evidence that was taking place? I imagine like most secure spaces there are a lot of keycard doors. Not like journalists can just go wherever they want in there.

More curious to me is the timing as we increase our footing outside of Venezuela.

In one of the articles I read, the journalist mentioned that they've wandered the halls for 40 years to try and overhear the conversations going on and that was the basis he used to probe further. Previously the press had great latitude on where they could wander in the hallways and people talk while walking...

[Zaphod58]

A number of journalists from smaller organizations said they were willing to sign, but were bullied and harassed until they agreed not to by the bigger organizations.

[DBCowboy]

Not sure I agree with it, but this is a result of too many leaks.

So the pendulum swings . . . . .

[BomSquad]

I just finished reading the revised memorandum that Vermillion was kind enough to provide a link to. 

I don't see anything at first glance that would constitute "intimidation" as most of the agencies that refused to sign were alluding to. 

The closest I could see was they no longer have unfettered access in the hallways outside designated areas and they are not allowed to solicit information that hasn't been cleared for dissemination from DoW employees or military members. They aren't prohibited from publishing said information if it wasn't solicited. If the employee or military member gives them the information, they are allowed to publish, regardless on whether it was cleared for dissemination or not. 

It specifically states these things in the memo:

"To be clear, these are the laws and regulations that apply to military members and DoW civilian employees and contractors. Members of the news media are not required to submit their writings to DoW for approval. However, they should understand that DoW personnel may face adverse consequences for unauthorized disclosures (see, e.g., Uniform Code of Military Justice Article 92 (10 U.S.C. 892); 18 U.S.C. 1905; 5 U.S.C 552a(i)). Any solicitation of DoW personnel to commit criminal acts would not be considered protected activity under the 1st Amendment."

And later:

 "For clarity, the receipt of unsolicited CNSI or CUI and its subsequent publication is generally protected by the First Amendment and would not, on its own, normally trigger denial, revocation, or non-renewal of a PFAC. However, if you solicit the disclosure of such information or otherwise encourage DoW personnel to violate laws and policies concerning the disclosure of such information, such conduct may weigh in the consideration of whether you pose a security or safety risk.
 
There is a critical distinction between lawfully requesting information from the government and actively soliciting or encouraging government employees to break the law. The First Amendment does not permit journalists to solicit government employees to violate the law by providing confidential government information. The press’s rights are not absolute and do not override the government’s compelling interest in maintaining the confidentiality of sensitive information. Soliciting or encouraging government employees to break the law falls outside the scope of protected newsgathering activities.
 
Solicitation may include direct communications with specific DoW personnel or general appeals, such as public advertisements or calls for tips encouraging DoW employees to share non-public DoW information. For example, an advertisement or social media post by an individual journalist or media outlet that directly targets DoW personnel to disclose."

All in all, this sounds like pretty standard stuff for any organization with a PR department that wants to focus their communications with the public. The press is being told that when they solicit information from employees not authorized to disclose such information, that the employee could get in serious trouble an the journalist may lose their privilege of working inside the Pentagon. This seems reasonable to me.

Could this be used to squelch a story or prevent free dissemination of information, perhaps, but to assume that is what is going to happen seems to me to be going off the deep end. If it were to happen, you can be sure that the media organization it happened to would scream it from the rooftops and try it in the court of public opinion.