At the end of July, Sean Parnell, the chief spokesman for Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and his rebranded Department of War, released a flashy video on his social media platforms in which he announced: “The era of putting public affairs on the back burner is over.”
It was fitting, as an indicator of how Parnell views his job and the larger conversation of public affairs, that he spoke in the video from the podium of the Pentagon press briefing room – speaking to an empty room without an audience in a space where he rarely briefs the press, a departure from the weekly briefings conducted by previous Department of Defence spokespersons. Purely performative, purely for the image and, as the young ones would say, “the vibes”.
Parnell’s message behind the video was a jarring departure from reality. A defence department so incredibly hostile to the press and so dishonest in countering reports on its actions can’t really be seen as putting public affairs front and centre. But the department appears focused on public relations over everything – tightly controlling the image of the influencer turned defence chief rather than presenting honest information to the American public about what the military is doing.
It shouldn’t come as a surprise that Hegseth, a man whose primary experience was as a news infotainment personality, defaults to what he knows. Before becoming Secretary of Defence – later changed to “Secretary of War” – Hegseth had never run anything larger than an organisation of just over a hundred or so people. Now he leads the single largest employer in the United States when accounting for the 1.3 million active duty service members, more than 750,000 reservists and National Guard and an additional 750,000 civilians employed by the department.
In fact, Hegseth has more experience being a Fox News pundit and political advocate than anything else. That’s not to knock these professions, merely to point out that for much of Hegseth’s professional life, the mission has been cultivating his image and “putting on a show”. From the earliest days of his tenure at the Pentagon, his focus on controlling the narrative, promoting his desired public image, and a strict, almost paranoid, response to even the slightest perceived criticism have been a defining part of his leadership.
He hired close personal friends and advisers to be part of his growing communications shop. He engaged in several witch-hunts among senior department staff to determine who might be providing unflattering details to the press. Often, these investigations were launched into stories that didn’t represent threats to national security, but were personally embarrassing or critical of Hegseth. He used the department’s public affairs platforms primarily to release hype videos in which he worked out with the elite units of which he was never a part.
Perhaps most concerning is the degree to which the War Secretary and his inner circle tried to prevent reporting on what they, and the military, were doing. Parnell, in his role as chief spokesman, has not just pushed back or corrected reporting he feels does not tell a complete or accurate story, as his predecessors might have. His go-to approach is to loudly and dramatically accuse the press of being unpatriotic or fabricating lies.
One of the earliest examples of this was in March 2025, early in the new Trump administration, when reported that then-Doge (Department of Government Efficiency) official Elon Musk would be receiving a briefing in the Pentagon later that week, suggesting it might create a conflict of interest due to Musk’s business interests in China. Parnell volubly protested and flatly denied any validity to the story. In fact, the reporting was true and the Pentagon rapidly changed their plans for Musk’s briefing after President Donald Trump expressed concern.
Hegseth’s PR machine has largely viewed its relationship with the press, and by extension the American people, as an adversarial “us vs them” situation rather than a necessary way to be forthcoming with the citizens whose taxes pay for their department. When incidents of military aviation flying in close proximity to civilian areas caused concern, Hegseth and his department did not launch a thorough review of safety protocols and explain what happened and if it was within parameters, or what steps would be taken to prevent the next occurrence. Instead, they used the opportunity to troll and thumb their noses at those they perceive as critics.
“The flyovers will indeed continue until morale improves,” Hegseth said at a cabinet meeting on 2 August, revelling in the sophomoric contrarianism. It’s worth noting that both the pilot and squadron commander of the US Navy’s Blue Angels demonstration team, subjects of the most recent incident, said the close flyover represented a departure from planned manoeuvres and was a result of the pilot’s temporary inability to fully control a turn.
It’s also worth remembering that a military aircraft diverting from its flight path in civilian areas resulted in the worst American aircraft crash in decades early in Hegseth’s tenure as Pentagon chief, and two navy demonstration aircraft suffered a mid-air collision at an air show in May. One would think the Department of War would take this more seriously.
This smug attitude of dismissal towards transparent and honest reporting comes during a war that, despite Hegseth’s chest-thumping, pep rally-style statements, is not going well strategically and which continues to decline in popularity. Perhaps out of awareness of both, the department has played shell games with accurate accounting on the war and its casualties. The department has delayed, or failed to post, accurate reports of combat wounded servicemembers from the war in Iran.
It wasn’t until media obtained previously withheld or unreported records through a Freedom of Information request in July that the full toll – more than 400 – of wounded servicemembers from the initial phase of the Iran war became publicly known. These numbers only account for the conflict prior to the April ceasefire – more have been wounded since the resumption of hostilities in July. Additionally, the Department of War seemed to hide the numbers of combat deaths from the official casualty reporting site, discounting the four servicemembers killed in Jordan and Iraq in July by playing clever pedantic games – claiming that due to the April ceasefire, Operation Epic Fury had ended and these new casualties did not count as part of the cost of that operation.
From the beginning of his tenure as defence chief, and throughout the Iran conflict, Hegseth has demonstrated he does not believe he, or his department, are beholden to the American public or to provide accurate information to the media that informs the public. He sees the role of Pentagon communications as a means to create a personal brand targeted at those susceptible to the spin, and to attack those who are not. It is no way for a defence establishment to operate in a healthy democracy.
It seems the claim from Hegseth, Parnell and others that this is the “most transparent” defence department ever is simply another attempt to advance the image they wish to cultivate.