If you did agree to the terms you'd be limited to publishing the official story (and can't talk to anyone for off-the-record stuff), but you get that for free anyway even if you never show up, so why bother with the extra expense of actually going to the Pentagon?
I think it's worth it for anyone that cares about the aesthetics of journalism more than actually reporting anything of value.
I also honestly don’t see the point you are trying to make, can you clarify?
Edit: the equivocation about people not being cynical always in their roles in a corporation (a very trite claim to begin with) is extra funny in the context of the literal laws that bind employees of corporations to do exactly what we all already know they are bound to do:
> They must discharge their actions in good faith and in the best interest of the corporation, exercising the care an ordinary person would use under similar circumstances.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duty_of_care_(business_associa...
You can be quite literally sued into oblivion for not being cynical in your roles and responsibilities as an employee of a C corp.
Also remember that “best interests of the corporation” doesn’t necessarily mean get money now and lose reputation for a long time. Some people might interpret it that way, others not. It is all context dependent and there is no guarantee people would be convinced for taking the long view if they can provide justification.
The ones who stay are influencers. Not journalists. Their viewers (almost certainly not readers) don’t know the difference.
Edit: I suspect you're right anyway. Typical mind fallacy on my part, as there have been people giving anecdotal stories of DOGE recruiters offering them a pay cut relative to their current roles just for the chance to do that work and get DOGE on their CVs, recruiters very confused that the response was that DOGE would be seen as a negative by future employers.
Imagine being an aspiring blogger/independent journalist. One can only dream of such a possibility as to join the press corp of Pentagon. Of course many will agree to all restrictions and rules for the opportunity.
You choose to keep at it because you think military stuff is pretty neat; you get paid by the view; getting briefings from the pentagon makes you seem important to yourself and others; and you like being a celebrity (albeit a very minor one)
So many communists ended up imprisoned by other communists because they weren't pure enough or because scape goat was needed.
Which is better than just being a normal person who goes to gulag with no wealth.
You saw it on a smaller scale before. Supporters of the current regime would get paid a lot for a while, then promptly forgotten about. Remember Steven Crowder complaining that 50 million dollars was too little - but where is he now? He's irrelevant. That was before they had gulags.
To be clear, his career imploded when he got caught on camera abusing his wife. It's not like he ended up on the wrong side of a power struggle.
And it's worth noting that as of last month he's now the #1 right wing influencer on Youtube. (The reason why he's now in that spot is left as an exercise for the reader.)
These YouTube kids...
Nothing stops them from publishing criticisms of the administrations talking points, or conversations that happen outside of press conferences.
So it's purely leaks.
Seems like the wrong way about it. If your own people are leaking information, you should fix that, not force the press not to report on it.
Obviously this rule would apply only to real journalists. Members of the party will get free roam. They will stay.
Just another day in the life of a regime.
Being a toady often has career benefits - and at least on the right it's often lucrative to boot. I mean, look at how Hegseth got his job.