Pentagon Softens Its Guidelines on News Coverage of Gulf War

The Pentagon substantially softened guidelines on Monday for controlling news coverage of a Persian Gulf war, but the procedures are still far more strict than anything seen in Vietnam.

Reporters will still have to travel with and follow the instructions of a “military escort at all times.” Any coverage of fighting will also still be subject to “security review” by military public affairs officers at the battlefield. In addition, this combat reporting will be conducted in organized press pools rather than by reporters traveling on their own initiative.

But eliminated are other restrictions proposed late last week by U.S. commanders in Saudi Arabia, including a detailed listing of the kind of information deemed “releasable,” a ban on talking to soldiers--even off duty in public places--without a military escort present and prohibitions on reporting any religious observances, such as a soldier crossing himself before battle.

The new guidelines also do not explicitly bar the press from photographing soldiers suffering from wounds or in shock, as the previous guidelines had.

Traditional wartime prohibitions against identifying the dead before the military has formally notified next of kin remain in place.

Journalists who were harshly critical of the strict controls proposed last week expressed some relief, but some said they still want to appeal to the Pentagon and perhaps the secretary of defense.

“At first reading, what they have come up with seems to go a long way to alleviating my concern that they were excessively restrictive,” said George Watson, Washington bureau chief of ABC News.

But Michael Getler, assistant managing editor of the Washington Post for foreign news, said: “The most important (restriction) is that security review . . . which I think remains a prescription for chaos in terms of timely reporting.”

If the military censor wants to stop something from being published and the reporter disagrees, the matter will be sent to press headquarters for review, and then, if necessary, to the Pentagon for additional review. But journalists have argued that this procedure could be used to effectively stonewall publication of the information until it is no longer relevant.

Andrew Glass, Washington bureau chief of Cox Newspapers, has urged the Pentagon to trust reporters to abide by the guidelines and use its authority to remove from the country any reporter who violates the rules.

“The idea that you must remain with your escort at all times is excessive and allows for no independent reporting whatsoever. . . ,” Getler said. “It seems to me there is no way that reporters are going to be able to abide by that.”

In the new guidelines, Pentagon spokesman Pete Williams has added language to reassure the press and public they will be getting a fair story. “Material will not be withheld just because it is embarrassing or contains criticism,” the guidelines say.

In addition, the guidelines say, the instructions from the military escorts “are not intended to hinder your reporting. They are intended to facilitate movement, ensure safety and protect operational security.”

In Vietnam, reporters were free to travel with any military unit that would have them and had space to take them along, and there was no security review. In half a dozen cases over the course of the war, reporters violated ground rules and had their credentials removed.

During the Korean War, there was also no military escort, but there was a security review or censor.