- Dozens of Pentagon reporters surrendered badges in protest after Defense Secretary Hegseth imposed a sweeping media policy seen as criminalizing independent national-security reporting.
- The walkout drew bipartisan media condemnation as a prior restraint threatening press freedom, transparency, and comprehensive coverage of the U.S. military.
WASHINGTON—In a scene straight out of a tense Washington thriller, dozens of journalists filed out of the Pentagon’s sprawling corridors on Wednesday afternoon, arms laden with boxes of files, chairs, and even a copier machine.
It wasn’t a fire drill or a bomb scare. It was a mass exodus, sparked by a refusal to bend to what they see as draconian new rules that could turn independent reporting into a prosecutable offense.
By 4 p.m., between 40 and 50 reporters from outlets spanning the political spectrum— from The New York Times and The Associated Press to Fox News and Newsmax—had surrendered their hard-won press badges, effectively barring themselves from the nerve center of U.S. military power.
The FrankNez Media Daily Briefing newsletter provides all the news you need to start your day. Sign up here.
The walkout, captured in poignant photographs of veteran correspondents hauling personal mementos like old photos and books to the parking lot, marked the culmination of weeks of escalating tensions under Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.
Just last month, Hegseth, the 45-year-old former Fox News host confirmed to the post earlier this year, issued a sweeping media policy that demanded journalists sign a pledge acknowledging they could be labeled “security risks” for pursuing or publishing any information—classified or not—that hadn’t been explicitly greenlit by Pentagon officials.
The rules, outlined in a 21-page memo that replaced a longstanding one-page access form, explicitly state that “unauthorized disclosures” could endanger national security, potentially exposing reporters to expulsion or worse.
“It’s sad, but I’m also really proud of the press corps that we stuck together,” said Nancy Youssef, a reporter for The Atlantic who has held a desk in the building since 2007.
As she lugged a map of the Middle East to her car, Youssef embodied the quiet defiance of the moment. Her sentiment echoed across the group, many of whom have covered the Defense Department for decades, building sources and stories from the inside out.
This wasn’t a knee-jerk reaction. The restrictions have been building since Hegseth took office in January, amid a string of high-profile leaks that have embarrassed the administration.
In March, Hegseth accidentally added The Atlantic’s editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg to a Signal group chat discussing sensitive U.S. military strikes in Yemen. An August memo, penned by Hegseth’s brother Phil and leaked to the press, called for ramping up U.S. troop presence on American streets to quell domestic unrest.
And back in June, internal Pentagon assessments of bombings in Iran surfaced, painting a grim picture of operational missteps. Each incident fueled Hegseth’s crackdown, which press advocates argue prioritizes paranoia over public accountability.
The policy’s rollout began in earnest last month. On September 19, Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell announced that reporters could only enter the building if they agreed not to publish certain information, even unclassified material.
This was a sharp departure from decades of practice, where journalists roamed much of the complex with relative freedom, summoning escorts only for secure areas.
Hegseth defended the move on social media, posting that “the ‘press’ does not run the Pentagon—the people do.”
Media Lawyers Weigh In
But critics, including media lawyers, slammed it as a “prior restraint” on publication—the most severe violation of First Amendment rights.
By early October, the backlash was fierce and bipartisan. On October 13, The Washington Post declared it wouldn’t sign, calling the rules “unnecessary constraints on gathering and publishing information.”
The next day, Reuters reported that at least 30 news organizations had rejected the policy, warning of “less comprehensive coverage of the world’s most powerful military.”
Even Hegseth’s old network, Fox News, joined the chorus. On October 14, the five major broadcast networks—ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, and CNN—issued a joint statement: “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.”
Only one outlet, the pro-Trump One America News Network, publicly agreed to the terms.
For the rest, the deadline loomed like a guillotine. Negotiations with Pentagon press aides yielded a slightly softened draft—swapping mandatory initials for a broad sign-off that nodded to “industry misgivings”—but it wasn’t enough.
As The New York Times’ Washington bureau chief Richard Stevenson put it in a statement last Friday: “The public has a right to know how the government and military are operating,” especially with nearly $1 trillion in annual taxpayer funding at stake.
The Pentagon Press Association, representing 101 members from 56 news groups, captured the gravity in a statement released Wednesday: “Today, the Defense Department confiscated the badges of the Pentagon reporters from virtually every major media organization in America. It did this because reporters would not sign onto a new media policy over its implicit threat of criminalizing national security reporting and exposing those who sign it to potential prosecution.”
They added a stark warning: “The Pentagon Press Association’s members are still committed to reporting on the U.S. military. But make no mistake, today, Oct. 15, 2025 is a dark day for press freedom that raises concerns about a weakening U.S. commitment to transparency in governance, to public accountability at the Pentagon and to free speech for all.”
Journalists, Media, and Legal Professionals Take a Stance
This isn’t just about badges and briefings. Hegseth’s tenure has already slashed formal press interactions to a trickle—just two since January—and mandated escorts for much of the building.
In January, he yanked workspaces from outlets like POLITICO, The Washington Post, and NPR, reallocating them to more administration-friendly voices like Breitbart.
A flyer reading “journalism is not a crime” briefly adorned the Correspondents’ Corridor wall on Tuesday, only to vanish by Wednesday—though an ironic old plaque touting the “free flow of information” still lingers.
Press freedom groups have piled on. National Press Club President Mike Balsamo called it “a direct assault on independent journalism at the very place where independent scrutiny matters most: the U.S. military.”
The Society of Professional Journalists demanded a rescindment, labeling it an attempt “to muzzle the press and deny the American people the transparency and accountability they deserve.”
Retired Gen. Jack Keane, a Fox News analyst, didn’t mince words on his old colleague’s network: “What they’re really doing is they want to spoon-feed information to the journalist, and that would be their story. That’s not journalism.”
Legal experts point to case law clarifying that once access is granted, it can’t be yanked arbitrarily without due process.
Some outlets are mulling lawsuits, but for now, the focus is survival. As The Atlantic’s Goldberg wrote in a raw first-person account published Thursday: “I’ve been evicted from a building I’ve covered for 18 years. I’ll keep doing my job anyway.”
He added that his outlet “fundamentally oppose[s] the restrictions that the Trump administration is imposing on journalists who are reporting on matters of defense and national security.”
Hegseth Stands by His Rule
Hegseth, meanwhile, insists the rules are “common sense” to curb a “very disruptive” press corps and align the Pentagon with other military installations.
apnews.com In a nod to the rejections, he retweeted some outlets’ announcements with a casual waving-hand emoji—keyboard warrior style, as one observer quipped.
But with leaks still plaguing his shop and now no permanent press corps for the few briefings he deigns to hold, the practical fallout could be a black box around America’s war machine.
As the sun set on the emptied workspaces Wednesday, one thing was clear: these reporters aren’t done. “To agree to not solicit information is to agree to not be a journalist,” Youssef said.
They’ll cover the military from afar—phones in hand, sources on speed dial—because in a democracy, that’s not optional. It’s essential.
Whether this dark day forces a reckoning on transparency, or just deeper shadows, remains to be seen. But for the first time in generations, the Pentagon’s halls echo a little emptier.
Should the Pentagon limit what journalists can and cannot say when it comes to national security and other secret intelligence?
Also Read: Republicans Face Growing Backlash as Voters Blame Them for Govt. Shutdown
Follow us on X: @NezMediaCompany
