Has the pro-Maga media turned on the Pentagon over Iran?

The question, asked during a 4 March press briefing with Pete Hegseth, the secretary of defense, and Gen Dan Caine, was a good one: if the US had “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear facilities during an operation last June, “what was the intelligence that suggested that somehow they became a threat once again that required us to get involved with Operation Epic Fury?”

It was asked by Heather Mullins, who works for LindellTV, the television network founded by Mike Lindell, the pillow entrepreneur, Trump cheerleader and 2020 election denier.

On Tuesday, a reporter from the Gateway Pundit, an outlet that “regularly peddles falsehoods and conspiracy theories”, as NPR put it in 2024, asked about reports that the US is unhappy with its chief ally in the operation against Iran, Israel.

“Whether this reporting’s true or not, what’s your message to Americans, those who supported the president and those who aren’t really in favor of this war and who worry that Israel might be taking advantage of the US’s backing?” asked Jordan Conradson.

After the heavy hitters of the Pentagon press corps walked out in October over new restrictions on access and reporting, many worried how the Trump-friendly media who took their place would fill the void – particularly if, say, a war started.

Major fears remain, stoked by questions bordering on sycophancy, but, so far, some longtime skeptics of the pro-Maga press corps say they are doing better than expected at questioning Hegseth and the generals who have been brought out on four occasions to give briefings and take questions from a large group of assembled reporters.

“I would say the questions have, with a few exceptions, all been fair, valid, and similar to questions I’ve had in my own notebook,” one longtime Pentagon correspondent who has attended all four briefings said. “Now, they’re certainly not being asked with the same intensity or pointedness as I or my colleagues would use, but I think that takes little away from their editorial value.”

Or, as Mark Feldstein, a professor of broadcast journalism at the University of Maryland, put it: “Even Pete Hegseth’s hand-picked right-wing media lackeys are starting to raise some of the same sort of obvious questions about the risk of Iran becoming a quagmire that mainstream journalists have been posing, a departure from these conservatives’ more traditional role of just mindlessly cheerleading all of the administration’s actions.”

In an interview, Barbara Starr, a former Pentagon correspondent for CNN, also noted the performance of some of the new contingent of mostly Maga-aligned media personalities, though she said that doesn’t mean traditional journalists should be excluded.

“It’s interesting,” she said, “some of the ‘new media’, I will say some of them have asked very reasonable, good questions. Some of them are pure propaganda, which is why I come back to my personal professional belief: everyone should be included.”

A second longtime Pentagon reporter, who also attended an Iran briefing, was less impressed with the questioning from right-leaning outlets, calling it “really below par” and “not really challenging”.

During the 4 March briefing, a correspondent asked about a statement made by Hakeem Jeffries, the House minority leader, who said in an appearance on CNN that the American people don’t want another “endless war in the Middle East that is going to end in failure”.

So, the reporter asked Hegseth, “what kind of message does that send to our enemies and what does it do to the motivation of our troops?” It was a layup for Hegseth, a former Fox News personality who made his name lambasting Democrats and the mainstream media. “Well, I’ve been through that movie before with the Democrats rooting against the country,” the secretary responded.

During Hegseth’s first post-attack briefing, on 2 March, the first question was given to Alexandra Ingersoll of the far-right One America News Network, who asked what the US’ “exit strategy” will be and “when it will be deployed”.

The briefing closed, however, with a much softer question to Hegseth, asking him what specific prayer he was saying for US troops in the field. The responses to the question on social media weren’t kind.

In a change, the Pentagon has allowed many of the legacy reporters who gave up their press passes last fall to attend the Iran-focused briefings, though they have mostly been relegated to the back of the room. The Pentagon has reportedly limited briefing room access for news photographers because of unflattering photos of Hegseth, though it claims it is doing so “to use space in the Pentagon Briefing Room effectively”.

While most of the questions have gone to journalists for right-leaning outlets, who now occupy the prime seats in the briefing room, Hegseth has also called on reporters from the BBC and the New York Times. (He called on BBC correspondent Tom Bateman on 4 March by saying “tie, right there.”)

Despite Hegseth’s long-standing beef with the Times, he did not lash out when asked by national security correspondent Eric Schmitt on Tuesday about the timeline for the war and about any “adaptations” the Iranian military has made in response to US tactics. (The Pentagon is also currently enmeshed in a lawsuit filed by the Times in response to the press pass policy change.)

“I appreciate the question,” Hegseth began. “Where we are is in a very strong place, giving the president of the United States maximum options.”