Podcast Summary: On the Media – “The Pentagon Kicks the Press Out … Again”

Podcast: On the Media (WNYC Studios)
Host: Michael Ohinger
Airdate: March 27, 2026

Overview

This episode of On the Media examines the Pentagon’s recent expulsion of mainstream journalists in favor of right-wing influencers. At a time when robust military reporting is critical, the government is narrowing press access, raising profound questions about transparency, the nature of the new “Pentagon press corps,” and the future of investigative reporting. The episode also features a discussion on the legacy of legendary investigative reporter Seymour Hersh—contrasting his dogged reporting style with the current era’s institutional obstacles and changing press landscape.

Key Topics and Discussions

1. The Legal and Practical Ejection of Mainstream Media from the Pentagon

• Background of the lawsuit:
  • Late last Friday, the New York Times scored a win in its lawsuit against the Pentagon. (02:08)
  • A federal judge blocked a Trump administration policy that branded journalists as security risks for seeking unauthorized information.
  • The Times argued this violated the First and Fifth Amendments, alleging the Pentagon could freeze out critical outlets arbitrarily.
  • The Pentagon claimed it was a necessary security measure, but prepared to appeal. (02:19–02:36)
• Immediate Reaction:
  • A spokesman said... the area reporters have used for decades... will close immediately. (02:49)
• Dan Lamoth (Washington Post):
  • Described the surreal departure of mainstream journalists from the Pentagon.
  • Noted drastic reductions in accessible areas—from about 70% of the building to just 5–10%. (03:55, 04:49)
  • Said previous access fostered relationships essential to journalism, “but rarely do you ever get pulled aside... and some big secret is spilled to you. It’s way more that you’re in the loop on things already being planned.” (06:48)
  • The new restrictions prohibit soliciting almost any information, not just classified data, creating ethical and practical barriers to journalism. (07:58)
• Impact on Press Dynamics:
  • "If you're going to tell me I can only get information... from the people authorized to speak, and they never answer with... substance—where's that leave us?" —Dan Lamoth (09:44)
  • Lamoth now relies more on phone/secure comms and source protection, shifting the nature of the reporting job. (09:46)

2. Rise of the New Pentagon Press Corps: Right-wing Influencers Replace Journalists

• Composition of New Corps:
  • Pentagon gave press credentials to a group of about 70 people, including Laura Loomer, James O’Keefe... Matt Gaetz, Tim Poole, Lindell TV, Gateway Pundit, etc. (12:16–13:47)
  • Many have histories of promoting misinformation or far-right narratives.
• Compliance and Attitude:
  • "They're pumped... Tim Pool said, 'We're not investigative reporters.' So... signaling that they didn't intend to do investigative journalism about the Pentagon." —Anna Merlan (13:47)
  • Influencers readily agreed to the Defense Department’s restrictive new policies, often lauding the rules as “reasonable.”
• Kingsley Wilson as Pentagon Deputy Press Secretary:
  • Anna Merlan details Wilson’s background as a MAGA internet figure and her track record of bigoted, xenophobic, and anti-Semitic posts (14:13–15:47).
• Examples of Coverage and Questioning by New Press:
  • Matt Gaetz asks about Venezuela in a way interpreted as supportive of regime change:
    • "Kingsley, if Nicolas Maduro leaves Venezuela today, what role will the Department of War have in post-Maduro Venezuela?" (17:03)
  • Laura Loomer raises questions shaped by her anti-Muslim activism, focusing on Qatar and the Muslim Brotherhood (18:03).
• Irony and Tension:
  • Many right-wing figures built their brands on adversarial, “anti-deep-state” storytelling—now agreeing not to dig for leaks or do adversarial reporting to maintain access. (19:10)
  • "For people... in the conspiracy media ecosystem... here they are praising the Pentagon, praising the presidential administration... agreeing not to do investigative work." —Anna Merlan (19:39)

3. A Conversation with Cam Higbee: Perspective from a New Pentagon Correspondent

• Background:
  • Higbee, a social media influencer with a large following, has assumed a Pentagon correspondent role for Fearless Media (21:17).
  • He sees his role as “the conduit between the United States government... and the American people... but it’s not to wander about... and harass every employee you see with the express purpose of extracting state secrets.” (21:52)
• Defending Restrictions Against Traditional Reporting:
  • Alleges, without specifics, that prior journalists created a hostile environment: "journalists... would camp outside of offices, harass people..." (22:23)
  • Downplays the importance of seeking unauthorized information: “We’re journalists, not Chinese spies.” (24:07)
• Challenged on Journalistic Standards:
  • Host questions whether withholding information at Pentagon request is at odds with press freedom and investigative journalism.
  • "Should the New York Times have published the Pentagon Papers? That's what they said at the time.” —Michael Ohinger (26:05)
  • Higbee counters that leaking information that could “get people hurt or killed” is reckless, accusing mainstream media of fabricating scandals. (26:18)
• On Bias and Accountability:
  • "I don’t claim to be unbiased, whereas they do. Every journalist is biased, including you." —Cam Higbee (30:58)
  • When pressed on whether he will hold Trump’s administration accountable: “Yes, on issues that I think they should be held accountable for. That’s my bias.” (31:39)
• Memorable Exchange:
  • Host presses on war crime allegations and the need for press scrutiny:
    • "If we only report what the Pentagon press secretary is saying... then we have no way of calling out their lies." —Michael Ohinger (25:25)
    • Higbee rejects the premise: “No, I think they’re trying to make a scandal just like they’re trying to make a scandal out of the new Pentagon press corps...” (27:40)
• Outcome:
  • Since taking his role, Higbee has produced “little to no coverage of the Pentagon” on his own channels, with unclear briefing attendance. (34:16)

4. Lessons from the Past: Documentary on Seymour Hersh and the Golden Age of Investigative Reporting

• Seymour Hersh’s Reporting:
  • Early in his career, Hersh eschewed official briefings to seek real stories in Pentagon corridors, which led to breaking the My Lai massacre story. (35:17–36:21)
• Investigative Tactics:
  • Hersh’s approach: build trust, search for off-the-record leads, and resist official narratives—a stark contrast to access-limited reporting today.
  • "Instead of going to lunch with my colleagues, I would go find the young officers... Eventually army guys just start saying, well, you know, it’s murder incorporated there." —Sy Hersh (35:59)
• Editorial Pushback and Pressures:
  • Hersh experienced friction at The New York Times when turning attention to corporate power, and left after editorial discomfort over scrutinizing the establishment. (39:48)
  • Noted pattern: “Sy quits”—he consistently leaves organizations when they balk at accountability journalism. (39:39)
• Legacy and Mistakes:
  • Hersh’s career defined by skepticism of power, but not without error. He admits to having “misjudged” sources or being “too close to power” on some stories, especially in Syria. (46:03)
  • On relying on a single source in the controversial Nord Stream pipeline reporting: “Sometimes it’s much better just to make it one... Even if there’s nine sources, sometimes it’s much better.” —Sy Hersh (47:47)
• Source Protection:
  • The film shows the sacred nature of protecting sources—Hersh’s paranoia and protocols, and the career risk for whistleblowers. (43:28, 44:14)
• Contemporary Relevance:
  • Laura Poitras (documentary filmmaker) argues the real current threat is not lack of journalistic will, but weakened institutional support and editorial caution in backing journalists under governmental pressure. (50:13)
  • “I don’t think journalists are gonna find the truth at Pentagon press briefings... that’s where lies are gonna be.” —Laura Poitras (50:13)
  • Need for adversarial journalism and calling things by their real names: “The erosion of trust in the media is because the public often feels lied to. They feel lied to by their government and they feel the press is also part of the lying.” (52:10)

Notable Quotes and Moments

• Dan Lamoth (on why access matters):
  • "Being in the building was helpful for building relationships... helps on contentious stories... But rarely do you get pulled aside and some big secret is spilled." (06:48)
• Anna Merlan (on new press corp attitude):
  • "They're pumped... Tim Pool said, 'We're not investigative reporters.' So just essentially signaling right from the start that they didn’t intend to do investigative journalism about the Pentagon." (13:47)
• Michael Ohinger (on hypocrisy of new press corps):
  • "It is sort of tying my brain in knots watching these people... agree to not attempt to uncover government secrets. Isn't that their bread and butter...?" (19:10)
• Cam Higbee (on investigative reporting):
  • "We're journalists, not Chinese spies." (24:07)
  • "I don’t claim to be unbiased, whereas they do. Every human being is biased and every journalist is biased..." (30:58)
• Michael Ohinger (challenging government-approved news):
  • "If we only report what the Pentagon press secretary is saying... we have no way of calling out their lies." (25:25)
• Sy Hersh (on source reliance):
  • "Sometimes it’s much better just to make it one [source]... Even if there’s nine, sometimes it’s much better." (47:47)
• Laura Poitras (on institutional threats):
  • “I’m very concerned about the capitulation of large media organizations to government pressure... That’s coming from institutions, not from journalists doing their jobs.” (50:13)
• Laura Poitras (on word choices and truth):
  • “It’s the job of journalists to be adversarial and report the facts as they see them, regardless of the consequences, without fear or favor... The erosion of trust in the media is because the public often feels lied to.” (52:10)

Key Timestamps

• 02:08 – NY Times lawsuit against restrictive press policy
• 03:55 – Dan Lamoth on leaving the Pentagon
• 04:49 – Loss of building access explained
• 07:58 – New press accords restrict inquiry
• 12:16 – Right-wing influencers named as new credential holders
• 13:47 – Anna Merlan on influencer compliance
• 14:13–15:47 – Kingsley Wilson’s problematic history
• 16:56–18:24 – Notable questions from new corps: Gaetz, Loomer
• 21:17 – Cam Higbee’s perspective
• 26:05 – Pentagon Papers comparison
• 31:39 – Willingness to hold administration accountable
• 35:17 – Sy Hersh’s Pentagon tactics during Vietnam War
• 43:28 – The risks for whistleblowers and source protection
• 46:03–46:36 – Hersh on mistakes, proximity to power
• 50:13 – Laura Poitras on the real crisis: institutional capitulation

Key Takeaways

• The Pentagon has systematically replaced traditional press with ideologically aligned influencers, greatly reducing adversarial or investigative reporting.
• The new rules, while defended as security measures, stifle journalistic inquiry and foster an environment where only government-vetted information is released.
• Many of the new “journalists” are not interested in traditional investigative work and readily accept limits in exchange for access.
• Historical analogies with Seymour Hersh’s reporting highlight the dangers of official “access only” journalism and celebrate the value—and risk—of relentless, independent inquiry.
• Current trends are deeply troubling for government oversight and press freedom, and media institutions—not just individual reporters—must confront their own capacity to resist or enable creeping government secrecy.

For listeners new or old, this episode delivers both context and caution: as the Pentagon seeks to control its public image, the stakes for accountability and transparency in national security reporting have rarely been higher.