For more than eight decades, the Pentagon’s press corridors bustled with reporters from the nation’s most respected newsrooms—The New York Times, The Washington Post, and CBS News among them. Their badges gave them access not just to official briefings, but to the informal, candid conversations that have defined American military coverage since D-Day. This week, that era came to a stunning halt.
On October 15, 2025, a new press policy announced by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth forced a dramatic confrontation over the future of Pentagon reporting. The rules, which require journalists to sign a document agreeing not to pursue or publish information not explicitly pre-approved by the Defense Secretary, set off a firestorm. Reporters from every major news organization—save for a handful of fringe and far-right outlets—turned in their Pentagon credentials and left the building rather than submit to what they called government-imposed censorship. The Associated Press described the mass exit as a protest that “highlights the deep conflict over government transparency.”
The new rules, as reported by The Washington Post and the AP, threaten expulsion for any journalist who seeks or publishes information not cleared by Hegseth’s office. Reporters must sign a document acknowledging these terms as a condition of continued access. According to the Pentagon Press Association, these restrictions “mark a significant shift in Pentagon-press relations,” ending more than 80 years of in-building coverage by the nation’s leading news organizations.
ABC’s Jon Karl, in a heated exchange with House Speaker Mike Johnson on This Week, pressed the issue: “Do you have a sense for why the Secretary of Defense seems to be afraid to interact with journalists who cover him?” Karl noted that Hegseth has held only two formal press briefings since taking office, a point Johnson countered by touting Hegseth’s public speeches and presence among the troops. “He’s very transparent,” Johnson claimed. But Karl pushed back, arguing that prepared remarks are no substitute for the open questioning that defines a free press: “They’ve basically forced the Pentagon press out of the building unless they would agree to sign a pledge that would make it impossible to be independent journalists.”
Former Fox News host and now Defense Secretary, Pete Hegseth, has defended the changes as “common sense,” insisting that the requirement to sign the document is merely an acknowledgment of the rules, not an agreement with them. “We’re not asking for agreement, just acknowledgment,” he said. Journalists, however, see this as a distinction without a difference. As one Pentagon correspondent told TheWrap, “What they are really doing, they want to spoon-feed information to the journalist, and that would be their story. That is not journalism.”
The new policy’s impact was immediate and profound. On October 15, dozens of reporters from The New York Times, The Washington Post, the Associated Press, Reuters, and others relinquished their credentials. Heather Mongilio, a Navy correspondent, wrote, “It’s such a tiny thing, but I was really proud to see my picture up on the wall of Pentagon correspondents. Today, I’ll hand in my badge. The reporting will continue.”
For Bill O’Reilly, a longtime supporter of the Trump administration, the policy crossed a red line. On October 17, O’Reilly blasted Hegseth’s demand for pre-publication approval as “craziness” and “not freedom of the press.” He recalled his own 1988 ABC News exposé on Pentagon corruption, which he produced without seeking permission: “I got the story. It was an award-winner—one of the most proud stories I’ve ever done. Didn’t get anybody’s permission to do it. Pentagon hated it. Hated it! Went after me and everything like that. So I know you have to do independent reporting, particularly when you have a trillion dollars of discretionary spending.” O’Reilly predicted that “the Supreme Court or somebody going to come in and say you can’t do it.”
The political backlash was swift. Congressman Suhas Subramanyam, an Indian-origin lawmaker, called the new rules “an attack on press freedom, the First Amendment, and democracy.” In a statement quoted by multiple outlets, Subramanyam declared, “The American people deserve transparency through accurate and fair reporting. Rather than attacking the messengers of his failed policies, Secretary Hegseth should instead consider doing more to support servicemembers and their families and keep our country safe.”
President Donald Trump, however, threw his weight behind Hegseth’s decision. “I think he finds the press to be very disruptive in terms of world peace,” Trump said, adding, “The press is very dishonest.” Trump’s endorsement, as reported by TheWrap and iNews, cemented the administration’s adversarial stance toward the media and reinforced the new Pentagon policy.
Since taking office, Hegseth has systematically tightened the flow of information. He has held only two formal press briefings, banned unescorted reporter access to many Pentagon areas, and launched investigations into leaks. The Pentagon Press Association and several major media organizations have formally opposed the new rules, instructing their reporters not to sign the agreement and, if necessary, to leave the building. As Mediaite reported, only the far-right network OAN and a few fringe outlets agreed to the Pentagon’s terms and retained access.
The implications for military reporting are considerable. With independent journalists locked out, coverage will increasingly rely on official statements and pre-approved information. “The restrictions may limit independent verification of Pentagon activities,” the Associated Press warned, “and could impact public understanding of military operations and spending.”
Some see the policy as the culmination of a long-building tension between the Trump administration and the press. Previous administrations, while not always friendly to journalists, generally maintained open access and fostered an environment where tough questions could be asked—and answered. The current approach, by contrast, represents what many view as a fundamental break with American tradition.
As the dust settles, the Pentagon press corps is left to chart a new path. “The reporting will continue,” Mongilio wrote, echoing a sentiment shared by many of her colleagues. But with the doors to the Pentagon now closed to all but a select few, the story of American defense policy may be told from a greater distance—and with far less scrutiny—than at any time in living memory.
The weeks ahead could see legal challenges or congressional action, but for now, the nation’s military journalists are on the outside looking in, their badges surrendered and their work more vital—and more difficult—than ever before.