Here is Tom Bowman’s (NPR’s lead defense reporter) opinion article where he mentions wandering the halls of the Pentagon

https://www.npr.org/2025/10/14/g-s1-93297/pentagon-reporter-...

If you don’t quote it out of context you’ll see that a) he doesn’t have any problems with not having physical access to parts of the pentagon and b) the quote was part of a broader anecdote where generals contradicted the secretary of defense.

The new pledge would not allow him to report that disagreement. Which is extremely telling.

They wouldn't have full access, but yes, journalists should be able to ask anyone anything. Asking is legal, and it's up to the person being asked to not say anything that a journalist isn't supposed to know.

What bad things have happened from what you're describing?

I would think anyone visiting this board would be educated enough to figure out for themselves what could happen should a foreign agent posing as a reporter asking questions inside a top military organization. Or any reporter discreetly obtaining information they shouldn't have.

They wouldn't get an answer hopefully. You do know that allowing journalists to ask all questions isn't the same thing as anwering all those questions?

In a democratic functioning society the gold standard is that citizen are allowed to ask anything and allowed to answer nothing. The GOP wants to reverse both.

I don't see that happening, they're just not allowed to do it IN THE PENTAGON.

That’s not what the new rules say. They say they will be denied access to the pentagon if they ask questions of military or DoD personnel that isn’t explicitly cleared by the DoD.

Access to the Pentagon is the privilege they are revoking but the action they are punishing is not related to the Pentagon.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/10/15/business/medi...

That link has the actual rules.

Well, military personnel shouldn’t be sharing sensitive information with any reporter, so not a problem? Once you tell a reporter, you tell your enemy (assuming your enemy can read newspapers).

When your "enemy" becomes the oversight providing public, we have a major problem.

A government with public alignment and maybe a slow leak will be fine. A government without public alignment needs to have every crack pried open until alignment with the public is restored.

Thus my point.

The status quo is that they have access credentials, which presumably come with some sort of vetting. So a "foreign agent" showing up and impersonating a reporter is unlikely.

I've visited the White House a couple of times and even setting foot on the complex as a visitor requires a background check, I assume the Pentagon functions similarly.

You honestly think a foreign agent impersonating a reporter is any more unlikely than a foreign agent--or one working on their behalf--isn't likely to be working within the government?

Hard to believe that for a long time you could just walk up and knock. Or picnic on the lawn.

We probably should have taken it as a sign things were heading a bad direction when stuff like that began to change…

What is the right structure for the Ministry of Truth?

An industrial reel spool of paper, direct from the mill, feeding into a continuous printer tanked with lemon juice ink, then feeding into an operating shredder.

It's good for garden mulch.

> This will not be allowed anymore and, considering it's the Pentagon, doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

I do love that despite the administration lying about everything there are still people who will take what they say at face value without a shred of critical thinking.

They're doing this because people keep leaking unflattering pieces of information and Petey gets his feelings hurt pretty quickly. It has nothing to do with security, and everything to do with control.