Military Reporters & Editors believes the Pentagon must not be allowed to ban journalists from the war zone based on vague accusations of unspecified broken ground rules.
Rolling Stone reporter Michael Hastings has still not been told what ground rules he broke when he wrote about Gen. Stanley McChrystal, ultimately leading to the general’s resignation. Yet a previously approved embed in Afghanistan with a unit that apparently has no problem with Hastings — and in fact invited him to embed — has been canceled due to those alleged broken rules. According to Stars & Stripes, the Pentagon scrapped the embed due to the “political fallout” over Hastings’ article.
But no one has denied the accuracy of the article, and the fallout came because of remarks McChrystal and his staff made about the civilian leadership of the war in Afghanistan. It seems ridiculous to assume that McChrystal, working for the first time with a Rolling Stone reporter, would not be savvy enough to ask his staff to keep it in check. The comments from McCrystal’s staff about superiors, including the president, were unacceptable behavior by military officers, according to the military’s own code. Yet the messenger appears to be catching the blame.
“It should come as no surprise to anybody if unit commanders in Afghanistan are apprehensive about doing work with this reporter in light of the previous experience that their commander had with this reporter,” Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell told Stripes. “You’re only as good as your word, and clearly they don’t believe his word is worth much.”
Hastings has said he broke no ground rules.
The Pentagon’s refusal coincides with an order from Defense Secretary Gates that all interviews be coordinated through the Pentagon public affairs shop, and with a three-page memo from Douglas Wilson, the new Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs, obtained by The Atlantic, that describes a need to better sell the war. They hope to do this by encouraging more big-picture reporting through senior-official briefings, and less down-and-dirty reporting of battles while embedded with the troops.
Not allowing Hastings — or any other journalist — to embed violates the military’s own stated rules to allow unbiased coverage in the war zone — good or bad. In addition to its role in trying to improve the relationship between the media and military, MRE was created in large part due to concerns that journalists would not be granted access to the war zone. That is precisely what has happened in Mr. Hastings’ case, and it has occurred on the basis of a vague and unsupportable allegation.
Military Reporters & Editors believes the Defense Department must state what ground rules Hastings violated, and we suggest that journalists be allowed to embed based on the rules established early in these wars, and not based on what story the military believes should be told.
