Pentagon moves to turn independent military outlet into a ‘mouthpiece,’ advocates warn

camille70 · Friday at 9:00 PM

https://www.cnn.com/2026/01/15/media/stars-and-stripes-pentagon-news-outlet

The Trump administration is exerting political pressure on Stars & Stripes, the independent military newspaper that informs US servicemembers worldwide.

Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell announced Thursday that the Department of Defense will “modernize” the outlet and “refocus its content away from woke distractions that syphon morale, and adapt it to serve a new generation of service members.”

Parnell’s statement came as a shock to staffers at Stars & Stripes, who haven’t heard directly about any changes yet, and who now fear that the news outlet’s independence and credibility is at risk.

The statement also drew swift criticism from several Democratic lawmakers and First Amendment advocates.

Fantine · Friday at 10:20 PM

I don't think any source influenced or controlled by Trump has a single shred of credibility.

essentialsaltes · Saturday at 11:23 AM

Stars and Stripes job applicants are asked if they back Trump policies
People seeking jobs at Stars and Stripes, which Congress guaranteed editorial independence, are being asked how they would advance...

They are already getting the loyalty tests.

Aryeh Jay · Saturday at 12:18 PM

essentialsaltes said:
Stars and Stripes job applicants are asked if they back Trump policies
People seeking jobs at Stars and Stripes, which Congress guaranteed editorial independence, are being asked how they would advance...

They are already getting the loyalty tests.

Perhaps they will change the name as well.

Tuur · Saturday at 2:35 PM

camille70 said:
https://www.cnn.com/2026/01/15/media/stars-and-stripes-pentagon-news-outlet

The Trump administration is exerting political pressure on Stars & Stripes, the independent military newspaper that informs US servicemembers worldwide.

Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell announced Thursday that the Department of Defense will “modernize” the outlet and “refocus its content away from woke distractions that syphon morale, and adapt it to serve a new generation of service members.”

Parnell’s statement came as a shock to staffers at Stars & Stripes, who haven’t heard directly about any changes yet, and who now fear that the news outlet’s independence and credibility is at risk.

The statement also drew swift criticism from several Democratic lawmakers and First Amendment advocates.

Being that "This...is CNN," talk of mouthpieces is ironic.

Tuur · Saturday at 2:38 PM

Okay, a question for the vets and armed forces folk: I've only occasionally read Stars and Stripes, and did more listening to AFRTS back when it was on shortwave, but never got the idea that either was absolutely independent. Your assessment?

essentialsaltes · Saturday at 2:49 PM

Tuur said:
Being that "This...is CNN," talk of mouthpieces is ironic.

Who exerted political pressure on CNN?

Tuur · Saturday at 3:29 PM

essentialsaltes said:
Who exerted political pressure on CNN?

Which isn't the same as asking if they are a mouthpiece.

Return to us to the thrilling days of yesteryear and the 2004 election. It came down to Ohio, and it was close. On election night, NBC projected Bush had run re-election. Fox News did a 'Say what?" as did a Christian radio station I was listening to, Then the Secretary of State of Ohio did an interview with NBC and stated that the number of uncounted absentee ballots were less than Bush's lead in Ohio. That meant if every single absentee ballot went for Kerry, Bush would still win Ohio. After the interview, Fox News called the election for Bush.

CNN didn't. It became a local joke: "Has CNN announced Bush won yet?" And CNN didn't until Kerry conceded that next morning.

What that the result of applying pressure or was that a willingness on the part of CNN that required no pressure at all? You tell me.

Pommer · Saturday at 11:01 PM

essentialsaltes said:
Stars and Stripes job applicants are asked if they back Trump policies
People seeking jobs at Stars and Stripes, which Congress guaranteed editorial independence, are being asked how they would advance...

They are already getting the loyalty tests.

Trump is doing what he wants, to test all facets of our Constitutional system, this is fine.

Pommer · Saturday at 11:04 PM

Tuur said:
Being that "This...is CNN," talk of mouthpieces is ironic.

I must have missed where Congress mandated CNN’s existence and promised the free-editorial independence that Stars & Stripes is supposed to have.

Pommer · Saturday at 11:07 PM

Tuur said:
Okay, a question for the vets and armed forces folk: I've only occasionally read Stars and Stripes, and did more listening to AFRTS back when it was on shortwave, but never got the idea that either was absolutely independent. Your assessment?

I’m sure that any seditious content has been routinely excised over the years; why’s allegiance to an incumbent President suddenly so important?

Tuur · 2026-01-18T06:44:49-0600

Pommer said:
I’m sure that any seditious content has been routinely excised over the years; why’s allegiance to an incumbent President suddenly so important?

A serious question: Do you happen to know of an issue of Stars and Stripes, circa 1944, critical of Roosevelt?

Tuur · 2026-01-18T06:47:18-0600

Pommer said:
I must have missed where Congress mandated CNN’s existence and promised the free-editorial independence that Stars & Stripes is supposed to have.

Which doesn't address the irony of one slanted news source claiming another is slanted.

Laodicean60 · 2026-01-18T11:12:18-0600

Tuur said:
Which doesn't address the irony of one slanted news source claiming another is slanted.

They call that hypocrisy.

essentialsaltes · 2026-01-18T11:16:57-0600

Tuur said:
Which doesn't address the irony of one slanted news source claiming another is slanted.

The Constitution protects the right of private news organizations to be slanted. The law requires Stars and Stripes to be nonpartisan and be free from editorial interference from the Administration.

Tuur · 2026-01-18T14:26:50-0600

essentialsaltes said:
The Constitution protects the right of private news organizations to be slanted. The law requires Stars and Stripes to be nonpartisan and be free from editorial interference from the Administration.

So...Has anyone found an issue of Stars and Stripes from 1944 critical of Roosevelt yet?

Tuur · 2026-01-18T14:55:37-0600

The problem, incidentally, is that the President of the United States is the Commander in Chief of the armed forces. That's why I've never asked anyone currently in active service or reserves their opinion of whomever was president; though I'm sure they have an opinion, I don't want to put them on the spot. It's one thing to grouse about officers; another to broadcast that far and wide.

SimplyMe · 2026-01-18T15:21:49-0600

Tuur said:
Okay, a question for the vets and armed forces folk: I've only occasionally read Stars and Stripes, and did more listening to AFRTS back when it was on shortwave, but never got the idea that either was absolutely independent. Your assessment?

When I was in Germany, I tended to read the Stars & Stripes frequently. I never thought about whether it was independent but I do recall them being relatively balanced in their coverage, though definitely slanted towards military interests in their selection of news stories -- obviously, for example, when talking of the federal government they would often highlight the military portion of the budget.

Tuur said:
A serious question: Do you happen to know of an issue of Stars and Stripes, circa 1944, critical of Roosevelt?

First, it might help if there were actually more than a handful of people, and any of them that actually posted on message boards, who served during WW2 and actually read Stars & Stripes in 1944.

My issue with your question is that Stars & Stripes doesn't really have editorials, in the way most other newspapers do. I seem to recall they did re-publish some major columnists, that work for other newspapers but even then they tried to balance between conservative and liberal viewpoints. So it is possible they carried a column written that was critical but, if they did, they also likely carried columns that supported the President.

Now, they would have published articles about what was going on with the war and what was going on in Washington, but it would have been written as news and not "critical" of a person or party.

Tuur · 2026-01-18T19:39:57-0600

SimplyMe said:
First, it might help if there were actually more than a handful of people, and any of them that actually posted on message boards, who served during WW2 and actually read Stars & Stripes in 1944.

I found some, published for the Mediterranean area during WWII, on archive.org. What I saw there was like a sampling rather than a continuous archive The first I happened to look at had that the French were ready to join in the fight against Germany and I thought that the Vichy troops had a different opinion. The ones I looked at didn't compare with a current issue I found online and not just because a Sunday issue from 1944 had an article about pinups.

Let's see...In particular is the current article on a GAO report on the Navy not having plans to replace a destroyer used for testing. Not controversial or Woke. That said, I didn't see anything like that in the WWII version, or anything that smelled like any sort of criticism.

We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

Pentagon moves to turn independent military outlet into a ‘mouthpiece,’ advocates warn

Newbie

Dona Quixote

Fact-Based Lifeform

Stuck on a ship.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Fact-Based Lifeform

Well-Known Member

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Fact-Based Lifeform

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Similar threads