Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

This kind of boycott needs to happen for the WH press corps. If there is a fear of not being selected to ask questions, or being expelled from the room for asking tough questions, then everyone needs to walk. Immediately.


Game theory applies here. There will always be one journalist without any moral qualms that’ll stay, betting on everyone else leaving, and making a scoop.


> There will always be one journalist without any moral qualms that’ll stay

They’re outed as stooges. That doesn’t matter to the influencer crowd. But I bet this costs the DoD a lot of narrative-shaping power.


I'm growing more convinced that there is a significant subset of the population that wants all of the press to be stooges.


> there is a significant subset of the population that wants all of the press to be stooges

A significant fraction of Americans are addicted to rage bait. They don’t care about accuracy as much as entertainment and ideological predictability.


When they're obviously lying to you, at least you know that they're lying.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vranyo

Known lies can still be effective.



> making a scoop

The chances of making that via a White House press conference is pretty close to zero.


>Game theory applies here.

Rely on traditional trade craft. A bouncing bevy of brothel, escort service, deepthroats; historically and dramatized, is a staid and proven primary source.


...so why did they unite in this case?


Because there’s nothing to win here? Nobody gets a Pulitzer for copy-pasting a press release from the DoD (or DoW, for what it’s worth)


That's some bar moving. In one case we're saying that even if you report garbage, your competitors are going to occupy the niche without you, therefore something something game theory.

But in this other case, well there's just no value to reporting garbage.


Have you ever seen a White House press conference? People scream their questions in the hope of being the loudest, because the president only answers a few. If most of the competition for question time leaves, there’s more time for you to get that juicy soundbite you’re after.


Have you seen a white house press conference lately? It's all just the same talking points. Everyone gets to report on the sound bites. You're choosing to describe these things as if the game theoretics are qualitatively different. Your description is doing more of the work than the game theory.


Only the one? Found the optimist.. ;)


Well, the White House press corps has already been changed to (how do I write this in a way that won't get me downvoted?) include more reporters friendly to the current administration since the White House asserted the right to determine itself who gets access (formerly it was the White House Correspondents' Association), so the chances of such a more-or-less unified boycott are slim. And I don't have any doubts that the Pentagon will also quickly find enough "warm bodies" (besides those from OANN) to prevent an embarrassing almost empty room at the next press conference...


It's less about having an effect but all about moral integrity. They want to signal that they still abide to their professional standards in order to keep their reputation among their peers and the public, those who aren't gleichgeschaltet (yet).


> And I don't have any doubts that the Pentagon will also quickly find enough "warm bodies" (besides those from OANN)

You mean like Tim Pool lol?

Could you, in a million years, ever imagine seeing his face in the White House briefing room? We're a pathetic country right now.


> (how do I write this in a way that won't get me downvoted?)

It’s sad that your speech has been chilled by the misuse of the karma system by some large faction of users here.


dang is, at best, oblivious to the fact that that this site has become a battleground. At worst, he's intentionally chosen sides with his selective removal of flags.


They should all ask the hard questions. If they're going to not have access either way, why not take the way that also exposes the corruption?


The press corps is already 50% right wing podcasters and 5th-tier far right / conspiracy outlets. And any time one of the remaining actual reporters asks even a mundane and non-confrontational question they just get called names, told their network/paper is failing, told their question is “nasty”, and don’t get an answer. The access they have is even more pointless than it usually is, they may as well not show up.


> The press corps is already 50% right wing

This is supposed to be unfair?


You left off one rather important word in your quote, there.


>>there is a fear of not being selected to ask questions

That's not exactly what's happening.

>>The rules limit where reporters can go without an official escort and convey “an unprecedented message of intimidation” for anyone in the Defense Department who might want to speak to a reporter without the approval of Hegseth’s team

On NPR (National Public Radio) a few days ago, a reporter said they could wander the halls of the Pentagon and ask anyone they ran into any question about anything. This will not be allowed anymore and, considering it's the Pentagon, doesn't seem unreasonable to me.


Here is Tom Bowman’s (NPR’s lead defense reporter) opinion article where he mentions wandering the halls of the Pentagon

https://www.npr.org/2025/10/14/g-s1-93297/pentagon-reporter-...

If you don’t quote it out of context you’ll see that a) he doesn’t have any problems with not having physical access to parts of the pentagon and b) the quote was part of a broader anecdote where generals contradicted the secretary of defense.

The new pledge would not allow him to report that disagreement. Which is extremely telling.


They wouldn't have full access, but yes, journalists should be able to ask anyone anything. Asking is legal, and it's up to the person being asked to not say anything that a journalist isn't supposed to know.

What bad things have happened from what you're describing?


I would think anyone visiting this board would be educated enough to figure out for themselves what could happen should a foreign agent posing as a reporter asking questions inside a top military organization. Or any reporter discreetly obtaining information they shouldn't have.


They wouldn't get an answer hopefully. You do know that allowing journalists to ask all questions isn't the same thing as anwering all those questions?

In a democratic functioning society the gold standard is that citizen are allowed to ask anything and allowed to answer nothing. The GOP wants to reverse both.


I don't see that happening, they're just not allowed to do it IN THE PENTAGON.


That’s not what the new rules say. They say they will be denied access to the pentagon if they ask questions of military or DoD personnel that isn’t explicitly cleared by the DoD.

Access to the Pentagon is the privilege they are revoking but the action they are punishing is not related to the Pentagon.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/10/15/business/medi...

That link has the actual rules.


Well, military personnel shouldn’t be sharing sensitive information with any reporter, so not a problem? Once you tell a reporter, you tell your enemy (assuming your enemy can read newspapers).


When your "enemy" becomes the oversight providing public, we have a major problem.

A government with public alignment and maybe a slow leak will be fine. A government without public alignment needs to have every crack pried open until alignment with the public is restored.


Thus my point.


The status quo is that they have access credentials, which presumably come with some sort of vetting. So a "foreign agent" showing up and impersonating a reporter is unlikely.

I've visited the White House a couple of times and even setting foot on the complex as a visitor requires a background check, I assume the Pentagon functions similarly.


Hard to believe that for a long time you could just walk up and knock. Or picnic on the lawn.

We probably should have taken it as a sign things were heading a bad direction when stuff like that began to change…


You honestly think a foreign agent impersonating a reporter is any more unlikely than a foreign agent--or one working on their behalf--isn't likely to be working within the government?


> This will not be allowed anymore and, considering it's the Pentagon, doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

I do love that despite the administration lying about everything there are still people who will take what they say at face value without a shred of critical thinking.

They're doing this because people keep leaking unflattering pieces of information and Petey gets his feelings hurt pretty quickly. It has nothing to do with security, and everything to do with control.


What is the right structure for the Ministry of Truth?


An industrial reel spool of paper, direct from the mill, feeding into a continuous printer tanked with lemon juice ink, then feeding into an operating shredder.

It's good for garden mulch.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: