The move targets the leadership of a military newspaper that serves service members and their families. The dispute centers on alleged insubordination and public warnings about potential censorship.
Hegseth’s Pentagon fired the publisher and editor in chief of Stars and Stripes, the military newspaper, by sending them dismissal notices on Aug. 21. Publisher Max Lederer and Editor-in-Chief Erik Slavin were given five days to appeal, turning what appears to be a personnel action into a new test of the publication’s editorial independence.
The Pentagon also sent a separation notice to Middle East reporter Lara Korte, according to CBS News. The reported reason was insubordination, but Slavin and Korte say the allegation is tied to interviews in which they discussed the prospect of Pentagon interference with the outlet’s journalism.
Dismissal notices start appeal clock
The immediate action reported Friday was not a completed removal with no recourse: Lederer and Slavin received separation notices that gave each of them five days to challenge the dismissals. That distinction matters because the process could still affect the timing, rationale or final outcome of the cases.
CBS News reported that the notices named insubordination as the cause. The Defense Department did not provide a substantive public explanation when contacted by the outlet, with a spokesman declining to comment Friday afternoon.
Washington Post reporting also described the Pentagon as firing the publisher and editor in chief of the newspaper, which is funded by the Defense Department but has historically operated with editorial independence.
Interviews are at the center
Slavin said the Pentagon’s public affairs office treated comments he made to CBS as insubordination. The comments were part of a July CBS Sunday Morning report that examined tensions between Stars and Stripes and Pentagon leadership.
In a statement to CBS News, Slavin said the notice cited his view that censorship of news intended for service members would be a “red line.” He said he would respond through the required appeal process and defended the outlet’s independence.
Slavin had described a hypothetical order to replace an accurate story with Pentagon-written material as unacceptable. That is a significant detail because it frames the dispute less as a routine workplace disagreement and more as a conflict over who gets to decide what the newspaper publishes.
Korte, who also appeared in the July report, said she works to cover the military community rather than the Pentagon, an administration or policymakers. She called the action a shame for an institution that she said service members and military families rely on.
Why Stars and Stripes is different
Stars and Stripes occupies an unusual place in American media. It reports on the military for troops, veterans, civilian Defense Department employees and military families, while also receiving Defense Department funding.
That structure creates an enduring tension: the institution depends on the government for resources, yet its journalism is intended to operate independently from the officials and commands it covers. Slavin said that independence is required both by law and by Defense Department policy.
Editorial independence does not mean the outlet is detached from government oversight in every operational sense. Its leaders and employees can still face administrative rules and employment processes. The dispute is over whether public statements about a newsroom’s independence can fairly be treated as insubordination.
Critics of the Pentagon action are likely to see the notices as a warning to journalists who publicly resist pressure. Supporters of stronger departmental control could argue that employees of a Defense Department-funded institution remain accountable to workplace standards. The available reporting does not include a detailed Pentagon case for why these specific statements crossed that line.
Questions reach beyond two jobs
The personnel action lands after reported criticism from Defense Department officials earlier this year, when the publication was described by the department as “woke,” according to the Washington Post. That earlier rhetoric gives the current dispute a broader political and cultural backdrop.
For readers who depend on Stars and Stripes, the practical concern is whether leadership changes could alter coverage of military policy, deployments, conflicts and the everyday issues that affect service members. Korte pointed to the outlet’s reporting during the protracted conflict in Iran as an example of work she said its audience trusts.
The central unresolved question is whether the appeal process will preserve, reverse or formalize the dismissals. It is also unclear whether the Pentagon will release documents or a fuller public account explaining its reasoning.
Until then, the competing accounts remain sharply drawn. Pentagon notices reportedly cite insubordination; the editor and reporter say the underlying issue is their refusal to accept censorship or political control of the newsroom.
The next test is transparency
The five-day appeal window puts the next focus on process. Lederer and Slavin can contest the action, and any decision that follows may clarify whether the department is relying on specific conduct, broad workplace authority or the public interviews themselves.
Transparency will be especially important because Stars and Stripes is not simply an internal Pentagon newsletter. Its readers include people whose work and lives are directly shaped by the military, and its credibility depends on being able to report critically when warranted.
The immediate fact is clear: the Pentagon has moved against the publisher and editor in chief of Stars and Stripes, alongside a reporter. What remains unsettled is whether the action will stand and what it signals for the editorial independence the outlet says it is obligated to maintain.
Leave a Reply