A Salute to the Pacific Stars & StripesThe presses keeps rolling after 80 years for a mission to inform
TOKYO — During the Vietnam War, an independent U.S. military newspaper strove to continue to ensure that American troops, no matter where deployed, could receive timely editions. This job fell to the circulation manager of the Pacific Stars & Stripes, who effectively supervised the world’s most dangerous paper route. In the Mekong Delta, U.S.Navy Swift boats shot bundles of the newspaper from mortar tubes to deliver them to soldiers on shore. That ingenuity continues to this day in ensuring Stars & Stripes reaches military personnel and their families in Europe, the Pacific and elsewhere. This weekend the Pacific edition celebrated its 80th anniversary. I was invited to be the press keynote speaker, delivering remarks at the celebration here. Prior to the event, I joined a tour of the newspaper’s editorial and printing operation at the Akasaka Press Center, inside a U.S. military facility just down the road from Roppongi. It is where the past meets the present. In the same building where the newspaper is still produced, the archives contain 80 years worth of editions and a half million photographs snapped by Stripes photographers, beginning with the U.S. occupation of Japan. The tour set the stage for the remarks I would make in which I desired to pay tribute to the past, marvel at the newspaper’s continuing at present and issue a warning about the potential future. I took to the podium following remarks by the deputy commander of U.S. Force Japan, USMC Brig. General Kelvin Gallman. “I know for 80 more years Stars and Stripes will be on the front lines, on the carrier, in the foxhole, at the commissary, telling the stories that all men and women that wear this cloth will always remember until they’re done with service and they will pass it on to their children, their grandchildren — they will always remember Stars and Stripes,” said the general, whose most recent staff assignment was at the Pentagon as the senior military advisor to the secretary of the Navy. As someone who spent a quarter of a century in Asia, mostly in Japan, and as a journalist who has long been a reader of Pacific Stars & Stripes from Bagram to Yongsan, I desired to share the Marine general’s optimism. I began my remarks by nothing the unique military newspaper was never intended to be a propaganda rag and the top brass did not always get that. For the ‘greatest generation’ – those World War Two veterans, there is an indelible image of two scruffy but humorous infrantrymen from the pages of Stars & Stripes: Willie and Joe. They were cartoon characters drawn by Sgt. Bill Mauldin who portrayed them as what real soldiers on combat duty looked like. General George Patton was not amused. He told Mauldin, whom he called an “unpatriotic anarchist,” that Willie and Joe were undermining Army morale and he was not going to tolerate it. Patton’s commanding officer, General Dwight Eisenhower, told Patton to back off, explaining the cartoons were for the soldiers, not the generals and thathumor helped, not hurt, morale. Mauldin had the last laugh. At the ripe old age of 23, he was awarded a Pulitzer Prize in 1945. He also received a Legion of Merit and a Purple Heart. There was one significant disagreement between Mauldin and the Stripes editors, apparently. The cartoonist wanted to have Willie and Joe killed off on the last day of the war. He was dissuaded from that. Our generals and admirals have long recognized the value, and sometimes the risks, of having reporters embedded with troops on the front lines. This held true from the Civil War until the Vietnam War. In more recent conflicts the brass has taken a more disciplined approach. Journalists in the jungles of Southeast Asia in the 1960s and early ‘70s brought home a realistic view of what was happening, the price in blood and treasure being paid and the ultimate futility of what proved to be an unwinnable war. Some blamed the New York Times and CBS reporters. And there were the incredulous Saigon press briefings, known as the Five O’Clock Follies. But it can be argued that this unblinkered journalism saved a lot of lives – those of American servicemen, Vietnamese combatants on both sides and countless civilian lives, as well. Stars & Stripes also played a vital role. Its coverage of the Tet Offensive in 1968 reflected the shock and strategic implications that mainstream outlets highlighted, not just official military optimism. The paper printed soldiers’ letters, which often criticized the war, questioned leadership or described low morale. This created a unique feedback loop where the rank-and-file could see their own skepticism reflected in print. Stripes reporters investigated corruption, black-market activity and command failures, contrasting with the upbeat narrative in official Department of Defense communications. Stripes’ journalists were not going rogue. It is spelled out in DoD policy requiring the publication to serve readers “as commercial daily newspapers” do -- to gather and report “good and bad” news about the military -- and to be treated like commercial media. Stripes does not, however, take its own editorial positions, it must present a balanced mix of syndicated opinion. The Pentagon’s “Principles of Information,” forbids Stripes from withholding information to avoid embarrassment. This arrangement is not without significant historical friction. Five years ago, budget moves threatened to shutter the paper; the president publicly reversed course on social media, but the shutdown order initially lingered in the system. That episode underscored a structural risk: if funding and management live inside the Department of Defense (or War), editorial independence can be squeezed indirectly through budgets, access or staffing—even without rewriting the rules Recent rule-making hints at the tug-of-war. In 2024, the Pentagon updated the Stars and Stripes regulations in the Federal Register, highlighting editorial independence for the public, even as some internal procedures were removed from the rule text. Meanwhile, Stripes journalists and press-freedom groups have objected to access constraints—such as limits on filing Freedom of Information (known as FOIA) requests—which the paper itself said it was working to unwind. I can offer a related caveat that is deeply personal. Unlike Stripes, the Voice of America’s independence is buttressed by statute: the VOA Charter, signed into law in 1976, and “firewall” provisions in federal law require editorial decisions to be made by journalists, with programming held to the highest professional standards. These legal guardrails exist precisely because VOA is taxpayer-funded and therefore unusually tempting to politicians in power. I can assure you nearly every presidential administration in the post-World War Two era sometimes bristled at VOA’s reporting because it did not always portray America in the best light. When political appointees in 2020 targeted me – as White House bureau chief and some of my colleagues, we fought back – becoming whistleblowers, suing and ultimately being vindicated by federal judges, an Office of Special Counsel report and an OIG investigation. As Stripes also has demonstrated around the world, our government-funded media outlets serve as shining examples of a free press and the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which restricts government interference with the press. Six months ago, the White House moved to dismantle VOA, placing most staff on administrative leave, firing all the contractors and freelancers, and triggering a wave of litigation. Federal courts have pushed back although the ultimate legal verdict is out, due to a slow appeals process. Newsrooms and press-freedom groups warn that the combined effect gutted VOA’s ability to operate, revealing how statutory firewalls can crumble. If an administration is willing to push past a congressionally recognized firewall at VOA, pressure on a DoD-based newsroom like Stripes is not hard to imagine: including contracting cuts or reassignment of key billets which might chill impartial reporting. For troops deployed overseas—often cut off from U.S. newspapers and domestic broadcasts—Stars and Stripes still serves as a primary source of information. If it were reduced to command messaging, soldiers would be denied the same diversity of viewpoints available to citizens at home. Its autonomy ensures that those in uniform can read about failures, scandals or controversial policies affecting them directly. Recently, Stripes became the first large media outlet to adopt a statement of ‘Core Values,’ which was distributed to the newspaper’s staff and leadership, affirming a commitment to impartiality, accuracy and transparency. Credit for this accomplishment goes to Rufus Friday, executive director of The Center for Integrity in News Reporting. Mr. Friday, also happens to be the chairman of the Stars and Stripes Publisher National Advisory Board of Directors. He was in the room with us at the New Sanno Hotel on Friday night. I was thrilled when my recognition of him generated a round of applause. In announcing the adoption of the Core Values, Stripes Publisher Max Lederer, Jr. noted that, “The current environment in the U.S. reflects skepticism with the news. It is important that the military community understands what Stripesstands for and our perspective in executing our mission.” In a published commentary, Stripes Ombudsman Jacqueline Smith wrote that the Core Values “are not mere slogans. They are commitments that guide every aspect of our work.” Independent journalism builds legitimacy. Troops are more likely to trust reporting on military operations, benefits or leadership decisions if they know the paper is not censored. That trust in turn supports democratic culture within the ranks: open dialogue, accountability and respect for factual reporting rather than rumor or propaganda. This helps sustain morale while reinforcing the military’s role as a servant of the Constitution, not of partisan agendas. Media Bias Fact Check gives high marks to Stripes: “Overall, we rate Stars and Stripes Least Biased based on balanced, low-biased story selection. We also rate them High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing and a clean fact-check record.” Stripes has not failed the watchdog’s fact check in the last five years. The independence of Stars and Stripes is also symbolic. If a U.S. administration were to curb its editorial freedom, it would mark a step toward politicizing the flow of information to the armed forces. That kind of control—shaping what soldiers can or cannot read—echoes authoritarian practices abroad, where state-run media dictate the narrative. Protecting Stars and Stripes therefore matters not only for the troops, but as a safeguard of democratic norms. I also noted in my speech the recent setbacks for the domestic and international press covering the Pentagon. Journalists this year have been increasingly shut out. News outlets which, for decades, maintained desks inside the Pentagon have lost their physical space. These include the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, NBC and NPR. One of the few places inside the building where reporters had access to the internet has been locked and their movements inside the building restricted. No longer is it routine just to walk into a spokesperson’s office to get a comment. And the Pentagon’s public affairs shop is a shadow of its former self, with nearly half of its officers leaving. On the rare occasions when the Secretary has spoken to the media, it has usually been from the White House rather than the Pentagon. I am on the board of the National Press Club, so in my remarks to the Tokyo audience I quoted our president, Mike Balsamo of the Associated Press, reacting to this worrying trend: “These changes raise serious concerns about transparency, oversight and the public’s right to know. I concluded my speech with telling the audience — regardless of their nationality, rank, office or political perspective, that they would leave this room understanding how critical it is to demonstrate to allies and adversaries alike that government-funded -- as well as independent -- journalism, serve audiences credibly while legally and culturally insulated from political messaging. In the case of Stars & Stripes, it is a model that has helped generations of U.S. service members stay informed, not indoctrinated. It also serves as an indicator of the broader U.S. commitment to independent, publicly financed journalism. © 2025 Steven L Herman |