[HN Gopher] Pentagon expands oversight of Stars and Stripes, lim...
___________________________________________________________________
Pentagon expands oversight of Stars and Stripes, limits content
Author : geox
Score : 163 points
Date : 2026-03-15 12:11 UTC (10 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.stripes.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.stripes.com)
| Eddy_Viscosity2 wrote:
| "The Pentagon has released a modernization plan for Stars and
| Stripes that affirms the publication's independence while
| expanding Defense Department oversight, introducing new
| restrictions on content"
|
| Seems like this sentence contains contradictory statements.
| rogerkirkness wrote:
| I assume it means changing governance policies while letting
| them continue to make their own decisions within that
| framework.
| halestock wrote:
| It doesn't.
| mpalmer wrote:
| In which case I'd say you are _inexplicably_ assuming good
| faith on the part of this government. Are you paying
| attention at all?
| Waterluvian wrote:
| When it comes to "simplest and most likely explanation,"
| the bad faith assumption is now the leading choice with the
| current regime.
| kjksf wrote:
| Your comment, of course, is a paragon of good faith.
|
| "Everything Trump does, even a mundane editorial memo, is
| evil. Trust me bro".
| enoint wrote:
| The GP comment mentions policy. I think you're downvoted
| for trying to grow the scope to include all of Trump's
| poems, homilies, and philosophical musings.
| terribleperson wrote:
| This is pretty obviously one more step in an effort to
| make sure that all coverage of U.S. military actions is
| positive and under the control of the administration.
|
| It's also part of a more recent push to make sure that
| Iran war coverage is positive. See the head of the FCC
| threatening to revoke broadcast licenses over Iran war
| coverage.
| nutjob2 wrote:
| Although you're being sarcastic, that is actually is a
| pretty fair description, on current evidence.
| mpalmer wrote:
| This person's ridiculous comment is a fantastic example
| of bad faith. Whataboutism, putting words in my mouth,
| and a singularly irritating (willful?) ignorance of
| current events.
|
| The person who posted this is perhaps not already aware
| of:
|
| - The FCC chair Brandon Carr threatening broadcasters to
| cover the war correctly, or else lose their "license"
|
| - Federal judges repeatedly calling out the admin for
| ignoring court orders, bypassing regulation, and
| arbitrarily prosecuting political enemies (Jerome Powell
| being only the latest failed attempt)
|
| - Hegseth saying he can't wait for David Ellison to take
| over CNN so the coverage improves
|
| If they were aware of these things, I would expect them
| to recognize a LITTLE significance in the removal of a
| commitment to 1A principles from a publication owned by
| the government.
| lovich wrote:
| They're aware but it won't matter. For all their
| accusations of TDS everyone on this forum can clearly see
| how deranged they are.
|
| It's a cult and you're seeing the adherents act like
| cultists here.
| estearum wrote:
| Aloofness is not the intellectual asset that you think it
| is
| roysting wrote:
| Precisely. It's the same methodology used to suppress speech
| and thought through social media where the terms of service
| and social media guidelines are used to create a micromanaged
| framework of approved speech and thought that just happens to
| align with what one particulate group or another controls.
|
| The next layer of this control harness is to neutralize the
| Constitution in America that protects inalienable rights, is
| the "freedoms of speech (within paternalistic approved
| boundaries), but not freedom of reach" mentality of, "sure,
| say all you want, but you won't even be allowed or able to
| see that we put you in a digital speech dungeon."
|
| We are essentially allowing and creating an analog to the
| very sadistic and evil conditions imposed by the ruling
| aristocratic class of the past and the hidden hand that ruled
| your life as non-nobility. You get thrown in digital dungeons
| with no recourse or rights. You are beaten and abused for you
| thought and speech. You have no right or ability to defend
| yourself from the torments and abuses of the ruling
| psychopaths, etc.
|
| That is why freedom of speech is so important, because the
| sick and depraved ruling class people cannot stand even the
| ability of people to talk about the abuses they perpetrate
| against them. It's typical abusive patterns of truly awful
| people that are the enemies of all of the rest of humanity.
| esafak wrote:
| Debasing language is the way of
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublethink
| Waterluvian wrote:
| "Disembowling" was correct. You had it right before. (:
| esafak wrote:
| I prefer to use least violent imagery necessary to
| communicate the point.
| throw0101c wrote:
| > _Seems like this sentence contains contradictory statements._
|
| "War is peace."
|
| "Freedom is slavery."
| shevy-java wrote:
| Trump kind of follows it - he declared his war against Iran
| over about 10 tims already.
|
| The book 1984 was written in 1948 (easy to remember). Kind of
| interesting to see that it also fits to the lame strategies
| pursued by Trump. The "flood the zone with shit" is an older
| copy/paste strategy of the KGB (as explained in the 1980s by
| Yuri, though he did not compare it to the flood-the-zone
| part, but it is virtually identical
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9apDnRRSOCk; though perhaps
| even that strategy is older, the chinese have numerous
| stratagems that are ancient).
| wat10000 wrote:
| Once, when asked about arming teachers in school, Trump
| gave a brief answer that went, we should, but we shouldn't,
| but we should, but we shouldn't. Four contradictory answers
| to a binary question in one sentence.
|
| The guy doesn't even lie. He's a reality TV actor working
| without a script. He says whatever he thinks will get
| ratings, and if he's not sure then he'll try different
| things and see what sticks.
|
| It will never cease to baffle me that so many people saw
| this behavior and said, that's leadership material.
| huhkerrf wrote:
| Trump's whole thing is saying things that sound both
| absolutely horrible and at least kinda sorta defensible,
| depending on who is hearing it.
| pstuart wrote:
| A thought that recently came to mind about this was an
| article about a local homeless camp that was literally
| trashing the area in which it was set up. Those people
| have effectively been discarded by society -- so why
| should they care about the mess they make, after all,
| nobody cares about _them_?
|
| So for the average voter who feels disenfranchised and
| abandoned by society, why should they care about what
| Trump says when he's famous, rich, and entertaining to
| watch?
|
| That's the only way I can make any sense of the matter --
| it still messes with my head.
| unethical_ban wrote:
| I hope the flagged comment trying to compare certain tropes
| of liberal thought to the assault on America, democracy,
| freedom and the legal system someday learns their comparison
| is foolish, and stops trying to be contrarian for the sake of
| feigning intellect.
| rdevilla wrote:
| "It's not a bug, it's a feature."
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_explosion
| apsurd wrote:
| > As a demonstration of the principle, consider two
| contradictory statements--"All lemons are yellow" and "Not
| all lemons are yellow"--and suppose that both are true.
|
| I am not understanding why we are freely supposing both are
| true?
| ewoodrich wrote:
| It's demonstrating the implications (principle of
| explosion) of a contradiction being allowed in a system
| of formal logic. You can change "suppose both are true"
| to "suppose the rules of a logical system permit stating
| both are true".
| apsurd wrote:
| Ah, that last line made it make sense, thank you!
|
| > You can change "suppose both are true" to "suppose the
| rules of a logical system permit stating both are true".
|
| It's calling out a potential flaw in the system and
| whether we want to do anything about it.
| bryanrasmussen wrote:
| I think the sentence just contains very laid back observations
| of hypocrisy.
|
| "affirms the publication's independence" = Says it's
| independent.
|
| "expanding Defense Department oversight, introducing new
| restrictions" = makes it non-independent.
|
| Conclusion: The sentence indicates the policy is hypocritical
| and built on lies. The sentence is not contradictory, the
| policy is.
| bbor wrote:
| Well put, totally agree! The key word here is "affirms".
|
| Here, watch; I hereby affirm that I am god incarnate, that I
| have no flaws, and that every unit test I've ever written has
| passed on the first try. It cannot be denied that I affirmed
| that!
| oliwarner wrote:
| "You're absolutely completely free to write exactly what we
| tell you to"
| rngfnby wrote:
| About a week ago Stars and Stripes had an article that strongly
| implied that the war with Iran had already had far more
| casualties than the (at the time) three KIA.
|
| I think it was about increased blood donations in Germany.
| dragonelite wrote:
| I saw this message spread like a wild fire in the osint sphere
| 2 week ago.
|
| Already told me war with Iran is going bad. Hell to the point
| that even John "we need to attack Iran now" Bolton couldn't get
| it hard anymore at the thought of attacking Iran.
| enoint wrote:
| I think that was Armed Services Blood Program messaging at
| Kaiserslautern. I read services like labor and delivery are
| still replaced with trauma.
| PyWoody wrote:
| Was it about closing the labor delivery? Social
| media forums abounded Tuesday with requests for advice stemming
| from a screenshot of a memo saying that Landstuhl Regional
| Medical Center's services for labor and delivery were suspended
| until further notice. The closure is "due to
| the hospital's primary objective," according to the memo, which
| was signed by Lt. Col. Elizabeth Gelner, a doctor with the
| OB/GYN clinic at Landstuhl. Although the
| primary objective is not specified, Landstuhl serves as a
| critical hub and evacuation point for U.S. service members
| wounded in training or combat operations in Europe, the Middle
| East and Africa. [0]
|
| [0] https://www.stripes.com/theaters/europe/2026-03-04/labor-
| del...
| leetrout wrote:
| > "We will modernize its operations, refocus its content away
| from woke distractions that syphon morale, and adapt it to serve
| a new generation of service members," chief Pentagon spokesman
| Sean Parnell
|
| https://www.npr.org/2026/03/14/nx-s1-5748020/pentagon-tighte...
| sigmar wrote:
| "Defense Department intended to "refocus" the news
| organization... it "should" republish content created by the
| Defense Department public affairs offices with a label describing
| its origin"
|
| Article makes it clear that they're banning the publication of
| wire services with the goal to make this publication more like a
| DoD PR team and less like a news source.
| kurthr wrote:
| Wait, they can't even internally remember that they're the DoW
| (Department of War) and not DoD?
| jfengel wrote:
| I suspect that was deliberate. DoW is the preferred
| nomenclature but DoD is still technically correct.
|
| The article is phrased in a way to imply that the author
| would rather the publication maintain independence. It is
| probably the last time she will be permitted to say
| "department of defense".
| derektank wrote:
| The Department of War is an "alternate title". Department of
| Defense continues to be correct
| dctoedt wrote:
| > _The Department of War is an "alternate title"._
|
| Like "alternative facts"?
| Arubis wrote:
| They're not. That's executive fiat. The actual name of the
| department changes if Congress says it does.
| OutOfHere wrote:
| What did they expect if it was Pentagon sponsored rather than
| independent?
|
| They can always post to r/WarsAndGripes.
| tw04 wrote:
| They probably expected it to be independent when it was created
| and funded to be independent...
|
| A free press is one of the core tenets of a democracy. The
| government supporting that was not just unremarkable, before
| the current regime it was expected. This is not normal. Nobody
| in this administration is normal, and none of then seem to
| actually want to live in a democratic society.
| OutOfHere wrote:
| All that is true, but dependence on the Pentagon is a
| vulnerability anyway. Tomorrow they could impose publishing
| outright lies. Free press is meant to be independent, not
| state sponsored.
|
| I don't disagree with your point; I'm just seeing it for what
| it is.
| georgemcbay wrote:
| Stars and Stripes has existed for 165 years and has been run
| independently (despite DoD funding) for all of that time.
|
| Is it shocking that this is changing under Trump? I guess not,
| but that isn't because this is a normal state of affairs, it is
| because the US is rapidly sliding into full blown
| authoritarianism.
| ivan_gammel wrote:
| Ah, the cool newspaper that fought the American propaganda of war
| before.
|
| https://www.stripes.com/news/military-terminates-rendon-cont...
|
| It was a fun story.
| jMyles wrote:
| Huh. I just watched Full Metal Jacket last night for the first
| time in a few years.
| llm_nerd wrote:
| Remember that Hegseth recently celebrated that CNN is being taken
| over by a friend of the administration who will eagerly parrot
| their propaganda in the service of keeping the idiocracy
| controlled. FCC commissioner Carr threatened media licenses for
| firms that aren't positive enough about the Iran war (or is it a
| war? Special military operation?)
|
| The US is in a bizarre place right now. The actions of this
| administration are positively _communist_ (in the most cynical,
| fear-mongered notion about communism), from enlisting tech execs
| in the military, to demanding complete control over all commerce
| (including demanding ownership stakes), to absolute chilling
| control over speech. Bizarre how the same people who have been
| using communism as their boogieman for decades are the biggest
| cheerleaders.
|
| Trump is a pathetic, demented, halfwit diddler Temu-version of
| Xi, and it's comical irony. It's why he's surrounded by garbage
| people, like the drunk tough-guy-speech-from-ChatGPT joke of a
| Department of SortofWar, Hegseth, the clown who only ever achieve
| major and is a massive embarrassment to the men and women of the
| armed forces. Pathetic.
|
| Though note that the communism is only in regards to government
| control, corruption and self-dealing. Zero benefits for
| Americans, unless you're a billionaire. Americans knowingly voted
| for this. They willingly lined themselves up to be future Soylent
| Green for their plutocrat class. Biggest self-destruction in the
| history of mankind.
| yoyohello13 wrote:
| It is mind boggling how so many people in the US are STILL
| supporting Trump. Like, do you not have eyes? All those movies
| about evil people gaining power with nonsensical support from
| the population were actually just telling the truth. Humans in
| aggregate are not capable of managing themselves.
| jfengel wrote:
| They do indeed have eyes. This is what they voted for and
| they are getting what they want.
|
| Honestly, as little respect as I have for them, I have even
| less for those who used to support him and no longer do. They
| had bad judgement then and I don't think their skills have
| improved. They're temporarily leaning away from the direct
| consequences of their bad choices but remain incapable of
| learning why that choice was bad, and will make more bad
| choices in the future.
| wat10000 wrote:
| They're excited that all those blue-haired liberals will
| finally get what's coming to them.
| throw0101c wrote:
| > _All those movies about evil people gaining power with
| nonsensical support from the population were actually just
| telling the truth. Humans in aggregate are not capable of
| managing themselves._
|
| But it's _their guy_ that is gaining power. Which is
| (perceived as) good _for them_ because he 's doing what _they
| want_.
|
| * https://archive.is/https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archiv
| e...
| matwood wrote:
| > It is mind boggling how so many people in the US are STILL
| supporting Trump.
|
| Welcome to the Fox News propaganda bubble. There's also talk
| radio and podcasts that will continue to ignore the issues.
| You also have to remember that most voters are low
| information voters. They are busy living their lives, so
| unless something directly impacts them, like the economy,
| they simply won't think too much about it.
| ivan_gammel wrote:
| > The actions of this administration are positively communist
| (in the most cynical, fear-mongered notion about communism)
|
| I understand from which cultural context this "communist" label
| comes, but in political science it's called "authoritarian".
| Small but important correction.
| scarecrowbob wrote:
| Doubly important when we're discussing explicit US propaganda
| efforts, I'd think, which certainly have cast "capitalism"
| and "communism" as weird and float-y signifiers.
| kergonath wrote:
| > The actions of this administration are positively communist
| (in the most cynical, fear-mongered notion about communism),
| from enlisting tech execs in the military, to demanding
| complete control over all commerce (including demanding
| ownership stakes), to absolute chilling control over speech.
|
| It is more fascist than communist. The communist way would have
| been to make the state take control of companies and then put
| apparatchiks at the top. This is the other way around, with
| companies taking over the state instead. But yeah, it's
| nitpicking at this point.
| dlivingston wrote:
| Percy Shelley's poem _Ozymandias_ plays in my head every time I
| see another short-sighted action by this administration that
| will cause long-term damage to our Republic: >
| And on the pedestal, these words appear: > "My name is
| Ozymandias, King of Kings; > Look on my Works, ye Mighty,
| and despair!" > > Nothing beside remains.
|
| https://youtu.be/sPlSH6n37ts
| shevy-java wrote:
| It seems as if the current administration is among the total Hall
| of Fame of lowest IQ.
|
| At the least they have big hands ... right?
| jfengel wrote:
| We elected them. A lot of us are vociferously defending them.
|
| What does that say about us?
| scarecrowbob wrote:
| Well, I'll grant you that the folks defending them are
| certainly making statements worth judging harshly.
|
| I am not sure if I buy the idea that "We" elected them.
|
| I'd be really stoked to know what I personally could have
| done (or encouraged my cadre / comrades to have done) to
| prevent this outcome, because I don't recall even being given
| a choice about who I thought should run against the current
| regime and I live in a state where I am a political minority
| (a left anarchist organizing against specific local actions
| like ICE "enforcement" and flock camera usage, among far less
| contested actions).
|
| This is an actual question, because I am curious and have
| read your comments enough to recognize your username in the
| pile of folks writing thoughtful-ish comments:
|
| is it the case that you identify enough with this government
| to count yourself among the (presumably judgement-worthy)
| "we" or is it the case that you count everyone counted by the
| US government as a citizen as "we"? Or would you state it in
| some other way? What do you mean when you write "we" in this
| case?
| jfengel wrote:
| When I say "we" I mean about 1/3 of us who voted for this,
| and about 1/3 who decided that either way was good for
| them. That includes a bunch of people who are diametrically
| opposed but for whom the main alternative wasn't quite good
| enough.
|
| That's roughly two-thirds of us. Those of us who took even
| the trivial effort to oppose this are a distinct minority.
|
| I don't think there's any that minority could have done
| differently. We are merely complicit in the suicide pact
| that is the Constitution, whereby we go with the majority
| and hope the majority would let us try again in a few
| years. That's an increasingly dubious proposition, and now
| we have to decide if this social contract hasn't already
| been broken.
| lovich wrote:
| You could have voted against Trump.
|
| You did have a choice as the democrats held primaries that
| year and Biden won the primaries. Unfortunately he withdrew
| afterwards and there was a scramble to find a replacement,
| but you don't get to rewrite history that the primaries
| didn't occur.
|
| If you didn't vote for Harris then you were fine with Trump
| as a possibility. Own your decision.
| scarecrowbob wrote:
| How about this: if you voted, you signed up in a system
| that says you're okay with the outcome of the situation.
|
| How is that not true? "I did what I could"... sure. So
| did I.
|
| But I wouldn't have been okay with either outcome, so I
| didn't sign up saying that after an election we'd all
| just be like "whelp, good game guess I should go back to
| brunch".
|
| So here I am, having to go organize against ICE because
| of the shitty political system that you reify. Thanks,
| asshole. If you voted, then you're okay with the outcome-
| that's what it means to vote.
| lovich wrote:
| No it's not what it means. Voting is using your small bit
| of political power to try and enact change.
|
| Not voting means you're fine with the status quo or
| others making decisions for you, you don't get to just
| pretend you have no say in the matter.
|
| Avalanche doesn't feel responsible for the snowflake and
| all that
| genthree wrote:
| The most-crippling part of this is removing their ability to use
| wire services (AP, Reuters, et c).
|
| It means they can only cover news if they send a correspondent.
| They cannot cover much at all that way. It basically means it's
| just a company newsletter now. They don't even have any
| correspondents covering the war.
| Animats wrote:
| That's the real loss.
|
| The original idea behind Stars and Stripes was that it was a
| general newspaper for US troops. Reading it gave general world
| awareness. DoD's own output is very narrow. Here are DoD's
| current press releases.[1] They're written in a very evasive
| style now. Here's the one on de-emphasizing the Havana Syndrome
| research office, titled "War Department Announces Realignment
| of Anomalous Health Incidents Cross-Functional Team to the
| Office of Research and Engineering "[2] Unless you know the
| background, that's totally meaningless. Much DoD PR today seems
| to be at that level - too defensive and obfuscated. Either
| that, or it's just administrative announcements. There's almost
| nothing about the current wars.
|
| DoD used to have something called "The Early Bird",
| discontinued in 2013. This was a reprint of press clippings for
| Pentagon-area staff.[4] It was supposedly restricted to DoD
| personnel to avoid copyright issues. It was politically
| neutral, but prioritized DoD issues, such as command changes
| and procurement, that would be very minor stories in the public
| media.
|
| Worth noting is that this war does not seem to have war
| correspondents embedded with US troops. There's not much info
| coming in from ground level on the US side. Al Jazeera has
| coverage from the Arab world. CNN has some people in Tehran who
| were based there before the war and are still sending.
|
| [1] https://www.war.gov/News/Releases/
|
| [2]
| https://www.war.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/4411182/wa...
|
| [3] https://www.marines.mil/News/Messages/Messages-
| Display/Artic...
|
| [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Early_Bird_(newsletter)
|
| [5] https://www.aljazeera.com/
| Arubis wrote:
| This is wrong and rhymes with all the sabre-rattling towards news
| orgs from the white house over the last couple days.
|
| It will also make the US armed forces _actively worse_ at their
| jobs. It won't even take very long. If you can't effectively
| reflect on your errors and consider non-politically-aligned
| points of view, your strategists are going to be running in the
| dark.
| justonceokay wrote:
| The strategists are hopefully not relying on voluntary
| journalism for their decision making
| SleekoNiko wrote:
| > The memo also bars reporters from requesting public records
| through the Freedom of Information Act in an official capacity
| and prohibits the organization from publishing "controlled
| unclassified information."
|
| If you need any evidence to refute the claim that the Pentagon's
| plan "affirms the publication's independence", this is it. Talk
| is cheap.
| Fraterkes wrote:
| I'll say something positive here as a european: the amount of
| diverse places that I'd assume would be broadly culturally
| aligned with Trump that have shown some form of resistance or
| pretty vehement disagreement with this administration this last
| year, suggests to me that there is a degree of widespread (kinda
| bipartisan) idealism in the US that's pretty unique in the west.
| justonceokay wrote:
| Americans individually are probably the most optimistic people
| in the world. The optimism might be myopically fixed on getting
| a promotion or winning the lottery or breaking the plate
| spinning world record. But if you don't have some big project
| or self improvement scheme then many people (and most
| traditionally successful people) will give you a wide berth.
| People without big dreams might as well have already kicked the
| bucket.
|
| Regardless of the government this culture is infectious. I
| think of Nikes famous tagline "Just do it" probably describes
| America better than any anthem or crusty document.
| webdoodle wrote:
| I'm surprised they even bothered to announce this, I just assumed
| military propaganda would psyop.
| sandworm101 wrote:
| Did anyone seriously think that S&S was ever independant? It is
| _the_ military newsletter for the US armed forces. It isnt the
| NYT and never will be.
| estearum wrote:
| "Independent" is not a binary achievement. It's a continuous,
| multi-dimensional scale.
|
| This article is about a move in one direction (away from
| independence) on that scale.
| carefulfungi wrote:
| I grew up reading the Stars and Stripes (before the www
| existed). A few decades back it was a decent summary of news,
| at least. It ran a page of headlines from across the US with
| state-local news. It carried a range of opinion writers. And
| did its own reporting in addition to syndicating AP and other
| news streams. Had the requisite comics and satirists. It was
| like a smaller version of the old USA Today papers. Kinda like
| the current The Week publication, but daily.
| SilverElfin wrote:
| Are they going to start inserting theocratic content too? Like
| when Hegseth bullied the Boy Scouts to become an organization in
| support of god once again?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2026-03-15 23:01 UTC)