The Military and the Press: Two Centuries of Push–Pull
Ok guys, I see a lot of press hysteria about the new Pentagon rules. I’m going to lay out the history for you, objectively.
From 1812 to now, here’s how military reporting in America has actually evolved: when access expanded, when it tightened, and why.
This isn’t designed to generate rage. It’s to help everyone (especially the media) see the pattern. It’s an ebb and flow that’s been part of American history for over 200 years.
Strap in. It’s a long one. But I think it explains how we got here. 🧵
Ok guys, I see a lot of press hysteria about the new Pentagon rules. I’m going to lay out the history for you, objectively.
From 1812 to now, here’s how military reporting in America has actually evolved: when access expanded, when it tightened, and why.
This isn’t designed to generate rage. It’s to help everyone (especially the media) see the pattern. It’s an ebb and flow that’s been part of American history for over 200 years.
Strap in. It’s a long one. But I think it explains how we got here. 🧵
1) Overview
People keep saying new Pentagon press rules are “unprecedented” and “anti-First Amendment.”
History says otherwise.
America’s default is a free press—but access to military spaces and operations has always been managed. Let’s walk the 200-year arc.
People keep saying new Pentagon press rules are “unprecedented” and “anti-First Amendment.”
History says otherwise.
America’s default is a free press—but access to military spaces and operations has always been managed. Let’s walk the 200-year arc.
2) War of 1812: the seed of control
News moved slowly, but commanders still tried to shape it. After New Orleans, Gen. Andrew Jackson briefly banned publication without approval and even jailed an editor (we obviously don't do this today).
Courts pushed back—but the point stands: from the start, commanders tightened info when they thought lives were at stake.
News moved slowly, but commanders still tried to shape it. After New Orleans, Gen. Andrew Jackson briefly banned publication without approval and even jailed an editor (we obviously don't do this today).
Courts pushed back—but the point stands: from the start, commanders tightened info when they thought lives were at stake.
3) Mexican-American War (1846–48): tech rises, rules lag
Telegraph and fast couriers turbocharged competition, but there was no formal system yet.
Soldiers printed “camp papers,” civilians filed vivid dispatches, and Washington accepted more risk—because timeliness still rarely jeopardized ongoing ops. Freedom high; structure light.
Telegraph and fast couriers turbocharged competition, but there was no formal system yet.
Soldiers printed “camp papers,” civilians filed vivid dispatches, and Washington accepted more risk—because timeliness still rarely jeopardized ongoing ops. Freedom high; structure light.
4) Civil War (1861–65): first big clash
Reporters operated near the lines, telegraphs sped news, and leaks hurt. Lincoln seized telegraph lines at times; War Dept threatened courts-martial for publishing sensitive movements.
Sherman expelled reporters he thought endangered troops. No lasting gag law—but ad hoc control was real.
Reporters operated near the lines, telegraphs sped news, and leaks hurt. Lincoln seized telegraph lines at times; War Dept threatened courts-martial for publishing sensitive movements.
Sherman expelled reporters he thought endangered troops. No lasting gag law—but ad hoc control was real.
5) Spanish-American War (1898): early shutdown
To protect invasion plans, the government barred reporters from battle zones and even cut undersea cables.
Leaks still happened, but policy was clear: first U.S. attempt at a near-blackout from an active front. Control swung hard to security.
To protect invasion plans, the government barred reporters from battle zones and even cut undersea cables.
Leaks still happened, but policy was clear: first U.S. attempt at a near-blackout from an active front. Control swung hard to security.
6) World War I: law + bureaucracy
Congress passed the Espionage and Sedition Acts; Wilson created the CPI. To reach the front, reporters needed credentials and agreed to submit dispatches to military censors.
Press freedom persisted—but inside the war machine it was structured and screened.
Congress passed the Espionage and Sedition Acts; Wilson created the CPI. To reach the front, reporters needed credentials and agreed to submit dispatches to military censors.
Press freedom persisted—but inside the war machine it was structured and screened.
7) World War II: maximum access, maximum rules
Thousands of accredited correspondents lived with troops—but under the Code of Wartime Practices and field censors. No future-ops, no exact locations, no weather, no sensitive tech. It was the template: escort + ground rules + security review. And America still had the freest wartime press.
Thousands of accredited correspondents lived with troops—but under the Code of Wartime Practices and field censors. No future-ops, no exact locations, no weather, no sensitive tech. It was the template: escort + ground rules + security review. And America still had the freest wartime press.
8) Korea (1950–53): brief openness → quick re-tighten
Early months were loose; then DoD revived WWII-style rules when leaks and battlefield reversals mounted. Takeaway: as risk rises, controls return. Courts didn’t force more access; commanders set the conditions.
Early months were loose; then DoD revived WWII-style rules when leaks and battlefield reversals mounted. Takeaway: as risk rises, controls return. Courts didn’t force more access; commanders set the conditions.
9) Vietnam (’60s–’73): the high-water mark of openness
No formal censorship. Reporters moved widely, filed without prior review, and aired the war’s realities nightly. The First Amendment thrived—but the military left the conflict believing uncontrolled visuals and timing eroded public support. The pendulum was destined to swing back.
No formal censorship. Reporters moved widely, filed without prior review, and aired the war’s realities nightly. The First Amendment thrived—but the military left the conflict believing uncontrolled visuals and timing eroded public support. The pendulum was destined to swing back.
10) Grenada 1983: zero access, national backlash
Press kept out of the invasion’s opening phase. The uproar led to the Sidle Commission and invention of press pools—a compromise to prevent total blackouts and protect OPSEC when speed and secrecy demanded it.
Press kept out of the invasion’s opening phase. The uproar led to the Sidle Commission and invention of press pools—a compromise to prevent total blackouts and protect OPSEC when speed and secrecy demanded it.
11) Panama 1989 → Gulf War 1991: pools mature
Pools, escorts, and security review of pool copy/photos became standard at the start of ops. Reporters sued for a right to roam; courts didn’t grant one. The message: publish freely, yes; demand unescorted access to combat, no.
Pools, escorts, and security review of pool copy/photos became standard at the start of ops. Reporters sued for a right to roam; courts didn’t grant one. The message: publish freely, yes; demand unescorted access to combat, no.
12) 1992 Principles: a negotiated middle
DoD + media agreed: open and independent reporting is the norm; pools only when necessary and short-lived; clear ground rules protect forces.
Media resisted pre-pub review; DoD reserved the option if lives/ops were at risk. The system recognized two goods: press freedom and troop safety.
DoD + media agreed: open and independent reporting is the norm; pools only when necessary and short-lived; clear ground rules protect forces.
Media resisted pre-pub review; DoD reserved the option if lives/ops were at risk. The system recognized two goods: press freedom and troop safety.
13) Iraq/Afghanistan 2001–2011: the embed era
Hundreds of embeds lived with units under signed ground rules (no future ops, delay specifics, protect TTPs, wait on NOK for KIA imagery).
No blanket pre-pub censors, but break the rules and you’re out. It worked: intimate reporting + preserved OPSEC.
Hundreds of embeds lived with units under signed ground rules (no future ops, delay specifics, protect TTPs, wait on NOK for KIA imagery).
No blanket pre-pub censors, but break the rules and you’re out. It worked: intimate reporting + preserved OPSEC.
14) Courts on “press rights” inside the military
Key line from the D.C. Circuit (Flynt v. Rumsfeld): journalists have no First Amendment right to ride with troops or access military spaces on demand.
The Constitution protects publishing—not guaranteed entry to secure operations or facilities. Access is a policy choice, not a constitutional entitlement.
Key line from the D.C. Circuit (Flynt v. Rumsfeld): journalists have no First Amendment right to ride with troops or access military spaces on demand.
The Constitution protects publishing—not guaranteed entry to secure operations or facilities. Access is a policy choice, not a constitutional entitlement.
15) Inside the building: Pentagon culture vs. law
For decades, Pentagon correspondents enjoyed unusually free movement—offices in-building, hallway chats, daily briefings. That was custom, not a right.
Sensitive zones always required escorts. The U.S. was an outlier in openness among major powers.
For decades, Pentagon correspondents enjoyed unusually free movement—offices in-building, hallway chats, daily briefings. That was custom, not a right.
Sensitive zones always required escorts. The U.S. was an outlier in openness among major powers.
16) 2020s shift: escort-first, affirm the rules
The latest policy tightens roaming, formalizes escorts, and asks for written acknowledgment of long-standing OPSEC rules. Controversial? Yes. Unprecedented? No.
It’s the peacetime echo of a pattern used in every major war: manage physical access to protect operations and people.
The latest policy tightens roaming, formalizes escorts, and asks for written acknowledgment of long-standing OPSEC rules. Controversial? Yes. Unprecedented? No.
It’s the peacetime echo of a pattern used in every major war: manage physical access to protect operations and people.
17) “But the First Amendment!”—the clean answer
The First Amendment prevents prior restraint on publication except in the rarest cases. It does not force the military to admit anyone to secure spaces, nor to let cameras roam command corridors.
That’s why past lawsuits failed: courts defer on base access and force protection.
The First Amendment prevents prior restraint on publication except in the rarest cases. It does not force the military to admit anyone to secure spaces, nor to let cameras roam command corridors.
That’s why past lawsuits failed: courts defer on base access and force protection.
18) The American balance—freer than peers
Even with escorts, the U.S. still runs the most transparent defense press system of any great power.
Reporters investigate procurement, readiness, casualties, even leadership failures—and publish. The constraint is inside the perimeter, not on the printing press.
Even with escorts, the U.S. still runs the most transparent defense press system of any great power.
Reporters investigate procurement, readiness, casualties, even leadership failures—and publish. The constraint is inside the perimeter, not on the printing press.
19) Contrast: Russia & China HQs
Russia criminalized “false” war reporting; independent military reporters face prison. China’s PLA/CMC is opaque; coverage is state-directed, foreign journos are blocked or surveilled.
No one roams their defense HQ hallways looking for off-the-record chats.
Russia criminalized “false” war reporting; independent military reporters face prison. China’s PLA/CMC is opaque; coverage is state-directed, foreign journos are blocked or surveilled.
No one roams their defense HQ hallways looking for off-the-record chats.
20) Contrast: allies
Israel legally operates a military censor; sensitive security stories require submission. The U.K. uses D-Notices (voluntary but heavy) and never lets reporters wander MoD unescorted. In the 1982 Falklands, pool + censorship dominated. The U.S., historically, has allowed far more proximity.
Israel legally operates a military censor; sensitive security stories require submission. The U.K. uses D-Notices (voluntary but heavy) and never lets reporters wander MoD unescorted. In the 1982 Falklands, pool + censorship dominated. The U.S., historically, has allowed far more proximity.
21) The real “ebb and flow”
High control: Spanish-American War blackout; WWI/WWII censorship; Grenada pools; early Gulf War review.
High openness: Civil War field reporting; Vietnam unfettered; 2003 mega-embeds (no blanket pre-pub review).
Middle paths: 1992 Principles; routine embeds with revocation for violations.
Pattern: risk ↑ → control ↑. Then it loosens again.
High control: Spanish-American War blackout; WWI/WWII censorship; Grenada pools; early Gulf War review.
High openness: Civil War field reporting; Vietnam unfettered; 2003 mega-embeds (no blanket pre-pub review).
Middle paths: 1992 Principles; routine embeds with revocation for violations.
Pattern: risk ↑ → control ↑. Then it loosens again.
22) What today’s policy is and isn’t
Is: a facility-access rule (badging, escorts, OPSEC acknowledgments).
Isn’t: a prior restraint on publishing, a ban on criticism, or criminalization of reporting. Reporters can still break stories via briefings, scheduled interviews, FOIA, Hill sources, veterans, and whistleblowers protected by law.
Is: a facility-access rule (badging, escorts, OPSEC acknowledgments).
Isn’t: a prior restraint on publishing, a ban on criticism, or criminalization of reporting. Reporters can still break stories via briefings, scheduled interviews, FOIA, Hill sources, veterans, and whistleblowers protected by law.
23) Why a change now? (operational logic)
Modern risks = smartphones, live-streams, metadata geolocation, insider leaks, and instantaneous virality.
HQs fuse planning and live ops. Escorting and signed rules are the administrative layer that makes existing security policy real in a building designed before iPhones.
Modern risks = smartphones, live-streams, metadata geolocation, insider leaks, and instantaneous virality.
HQs fuse planning and live ops. Escorting and signed rules are the administrative layer that makes existing security policy real in a building designed before iPhones.
24) Takeaway for critics
U.S. history doesn’t support the claim that escorting reporters in secure military HQs is new or unconstitutional. What’s new is the tech and tempo.
The test isn’t “roam free or gagged.” It’s whether DoW pairs tight perimeter rules with real transparency in forums built for it.
U.S. history doesn’t support the claim that escorting reporters in secure military HQs is new or unconstitutional. What’s new is the tech and tempo.
The test isn’t “roam free or gagged.” It’s whether DoW pairs tight perimeter rules with real transparency in forums built for it.
25) Bottom line
America still runs the freest defense press ecosystem on earth. The pendulum has swung for two centuries—and it will swing again. Protect troops and secrets inside the wire. Tell the truth outside it. That’s the American balance.
America still runs the freest defense press ecosystem on earth. The pendulum has swung for two centuries—and it will swing again. Protect troops and secrets inside the wire. Tell the truth outside it. That’s the American balance.
I stand ready for correction, comments, or concerns.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
