logo
OAN's Pentagon reporter learns the limits of expressing her own opinion

OAN's Pentagon reporter learns the limits of expressing her own opinion

Assigned to cover the Pentagon for the conservative outlet One America News Network, Gabrielle Cuccia didn't pretend to be an unbiased reporter. She describes herself as 'a MAGA girl' who is unapologetically defiant in her support of President Donald Trump.
Yet days after publicly criticizing a Trump appointee, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Cuccia found herself out of a job.
In taking to Substack last week to express a personal opinion about a figure she covers, Cuccia did something that would be frowned upon in many legacy newsrooms. The message that she was sent, however, is most likely to resound in places where opinion is fine — but only a certain variety.
Cuccia's lengthy Substack post, 'The Secretary of Defense-ive,' was posted three days after Hegseth issued new rules that banned reporters from accessing large areas of the Pentagon without being watched by his minders.
She criticized him for limiting freedom of movement in the name of national security.
Cuccia praises responsible Pentagon reporters
'The Pentagon wants to paint a picture that journalists are freely roaming classified spaces, sneaking into (secure areas), and leaking top-secret information,' she wrote. 'And that is simply not true. There are security cameras everywhere, protocols in place and quite frankly, it would be painfully obvious if a reporter was in a space they didn't belong.'
Cuccia said the real leaks from the Pentagon have come from Hegseth's own team and other senior officials. Hegseth, a former Fox News personality, was embarrassed in March when The Atlantic magazine's editor-in-chief was mistakenly included in a Signal chat in which the defense secretary discussed upcoming military strikes.
She criticized Hegseth for not yet holding a media briefing at the Pentagon.
'The Commander-in-Chief welcomes the hard questions … and yes, even the dumb ones,' she wrote. 'Why won't the Secretary of Defense do the same?'
Three days after her Memorial Day Substack post, Cuccia said her Pentagon access badge was revoked. 'By Friday,' she said, 'I was out of a job.'
The Defense Department did not pull Cuccia's credentials, according to a Defense official who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss personnel issues. Cuccia said OAN told her the Substack piece had been 'put on their radar,' but she wouldn't say by who. She wouldn't speak further about what her employer told her, and OAN president Charles Herring told The Associated Press that it does not discuss personnel issues.
'When a reporter asks inconvenient questions about government overreach, the response should be accountability — not silence, and certainly not separation,' Cuccia said.
Traditionally, the legacy media does not want its journalists expressing opinions about people they cover, since it calls into doubt their ability to report without bias. But exceptions are often made in cases where media access is at issue, said Tom Rosenstiel, a journalism professor at the University of Maryland.
The New York Times, for example, institutionally called upon Joe Biden to meet more often with journalists when he was president. The Pentagon Press Association said Hegseth's restrictions were a direct assault on the freedom of the press.
Making no secret of allegiance to Trump
One America News Network makes no secret of its allegiance to Trump. When Matt Gaetz's nomination as Trump's attorney general fell apart following the election, OAN quickly signed him up as a contributor. OAN faced lawsuits — and negotiated settlements — for its promotion of Trump's false theories that he did not lose the 2020 election.
When Hegseth earlier this year evicted several news organizations from their Pentagon workspaces and gave more room to friendly outlets, Cuccia was assigned space formerly held by NBC News. Before Hegseth aide Sean Parnell's only media briefing, Cuccia said Hegseth's team reached out to her in advance to find out what questions she wanted to ask, something that would never be done for most media outlets.
If OAN is responsible for removing Cuccia, it's a 'take no quarter position,' Rosenstiel said. 'There is no room, if you're on the team, to say anything that is negative.'
Monday Mornings
The latest local business news and a lookahead to the coming week.
He said he'd be interested to see if any representatives from pro-Trump media outlets defend her. 'Are they silent, or do they rally to her in any way?' he asked. Trump, in the past, has frequently criticized Fox News Channel for saying anything on the air that he deemed negative.
Part of Cuccia's Substack post sounded almost prescient about what might happen to her, when she reminisced about the energy of the early Make America Great Again movement. Questioning government then, she noted, was a point of pride.
'Somewhere along the way, we as a collective decided — if anyone ever questioned a policy or person within the MAGA movement — that they weren't MAGA enough,' she wrote. 'That they were deep state, that they couldn't be trusted, that they didn't love America as much as we do and that … to put it bluntly, they sucked.'
___
AP correspondent Lolita C. Baldor in Washington contributed to this report. David Bauder writes about the intersection of media and entertainment for the AP. Follow him at http://x.com/dbauder and https://bsky.app/profile/dbauder.bsky.social

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

U.S. ‘can't fight a war' without American steel, Trump tariff chief says
U.S. ‘can't fight a war' without American steel, Trump tariff chief says

Global News

time19 hours ago

  • Global News

U.S. ‘can't fight a war' without American steel, Trump tariff chief says

U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick on Wednesday defended the doubling of steel and aluminum tariffs by claiming the United States 'can't fight a war' without domestic production of those materials. Lutnick made the comments while denying the immediate real-world implications that steep tariffs will have on U.S. manufacturing during testimony in front of the U.S. Senate appropriations committee that focused in part on U.S. President Donald Trump's tariff policy. 'The big issue is, you can't fight a war without steel and aluminum production in America,' Lutnick said during an exchange with Democratic U.S. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, who was asking if he or Trump consulted with the Pentagon before raising those tariffs. 'If you don't have the ability to make your own steel and aluminum, you can't fight a war, and that is what the president's doing. He's trying to make sure that we make sufficient steel and aluminum to protect our defence.' Story continues below advertisement 'Which I certainly support,' Shaheen said, to which Lutnick replied, 'Sounds like we exactly agree.' 'But I don't agree on the way it's been done,' Shaheen responded, 'because we're not going to have the steel that we need immediately to provide the supplies that we need immediately. So we need to do a little better planning before we put in place those kinds of tariffs.' Trump signed an executive order Tuesday that raised tariffs on steel and aluminum imports from 25 per cent — a rate put in place three months ago — to 50 per cent, effective Wednesday. 2:34 Why is Trump doubling steel and aluminum tariffs? In her exchange with Lutnick, Shaheen highlighted concerns from a ball bearing manufacturer in her state that supplies the U.S. aerospace industry. Get breaking National news For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen. Sign up for breaking National newsletter Sign Up By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy While she didn't name the company, she said it has only one domestic steel supplier, with the rest of its materials sourced from Canada and the Indo-Pacific. Story continues below advertisement 'Those (foreign suppliers) have been eliminated under the tariffs,' she said, adding that the company is facing both rising costs and production lead times that have grown from 20 weeks to two-and-a-half years. 'What was the determination about how you address those kinds of extended lead times for companies that are producing equipment that's critical to our national security?' she asked. 'It's really a cost issue, not an access issue,' Lutnick replied. 'Well, not according to this company in New Hampshire,' Shaheen said. 'It's an access issue for them.' 'Well, that would be illogical since it's just a tariff, which is monetary,' Lutnick said. 'It's not a sanction. It's just a monetary one.' Canadian steel and aluminum producers — as well as other sectors affected by Trump's various tariff regimes, like automakers — have said higher price points for their products have led to cancelled U.S. contracts. 2:06 Canada ponders response to Trump's latest steel tariffs threat The Canadian Steel Producers Association said last weekend that doubling tariffs to 50 per cent 'essentially closes the U.S. market to our domestic industry for half of its production' and will create 'mass disruption' to North American supply chains. Story continues below advertisement Trump and Lutnick have said tariffs on countries and industries are meant to drive manufacturing back to the U.S. by raising the cost of foreign goods. The tariffs on steel and aluminum specifically were imposed under national security concerns. Trump administration officials have focused particularly on China, warning Beijing could cut off supplies if the trade war escalates. White House economic advisor Kevin Hassett told ABC News on Sunday that China is 'dumping' cheap steel products into the U.S. and other countries 'because it prepares them to win a war, because they're the only ones who can make steel.' 'If we have cannons but not cannonballs, then we can't fight a war,' Hassett said. 'We have to have a steel industry that's ready for American defence.' U.S. defence and aerospace manufacturers have relied on Canadian steel and aluminum for decades — including in wartime. Canada supplied raw materials, components and fully built military vehicles and equipment to the U.S. during the Second World War, helping to bolster American military forces. It later did the same for U.S. forces in the Korean, Vietnam and Middle East wars, as it has for Britain and other allies. To this day, Canadian steel and aluminum is used to build American aircraft, missiles, space technologies and other equipment. Story continues below advertisement The Canadian government has vowed to bolster its own domestic defence industry with Canadian-made steel and aluminum in an effort to protect those industries from Trump's tariffs and move away from U.S. reliance. Defence Minister David McGuinty told a conference of defence contractors last week that the government's goals for boosting the Canadian sector will match the speed at which production ramped up during the Second World War. Lutnick on Wednesday continued to insist that higher tariffs and related costs are a separate issue from supply, and even offered to explain 'how steel works' to Shaheen after the public testimony. 'The company that I've been talking to in New Hampshire understands how it works,' Shaheen responded, 'and they have a problem. They don't need you to explain it to them. They know because they've been in business for years.'

Top 3 ETFs Defense Hawks Are Buying
Top 3 ETFs Defense Hawks Are Buying

Globe and Mail

timea day ago

  • Globe and Mail

Top 3 ETFs Defense Hawks Are Buying

Global military spending is accelerating, with total worldwide military expenditures for 2024 estimated at $2.72 trillion. This marks a 9.4% increase in real terms over 2023 levels and the sharpest year-over-year (YOY) rise in decades. While spending in the major military powers of the United States, Russia, China, Germany, and India still accounts for the majority of total defense spending, budgets in other parts of the world are also increasing, particularly given instability in the Middle East and concern in Europe about the escalation of Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Defense hawk investors who believe this trend is likely to continue may be inclined to invest in aerospace and defense firms that are most likely to benefit from increased military spending. Individual investments in this area are accessible for U.S. investors but less so for international defense companies. Hawkish investors seeking broader international exposure to the defense space might consider a dedicated and expansive exchange-traded fund (ETF) targeting this industry. Targeted Global Defense Exposure in a Popular Fund [content-module:CompanyOverview|NYSEARCA:SHLD] The Global X Defense Tech ETF (NYSEARCA: SHLD) has more than $2 billion in assets under management (AUM), making it one of the largest and most popular defense-focused ETFs. SHLD includes about 40 holdings with companies in the industrials, cybersecurity, AI, and drone systems spaces. The fund is fairly concentrated, with positions in German automotive and arms manufacturer Rheinmetall AG (ETR: RHM) and U.S.-based Palantir Technologies Inc. (NASDAQ: PLTR) together accounting for more than 21% of the portfolio. Just over half of the portfolio is given over to U.S. companies, with Germany, France, Britain, and South Korea among the other markets best represented. SHLD offers an expense ratio of 0.50%, which is somewhat high for a passively managed fund but understandable given its global exposure and specialized theme. What's more, the fund's performance in recent months has likely more than made up for its fee—SHLD has returned nearly 52% year-to-date (YTD) and 69% in the past 12 months. North American and European Focus With a New Fund [content-module:CompanyOverview|NASDAQ:NATO] The Themes Transatlantic Defense ETF (NASDAQ: NATO) is a fund specifically focused on aerospace and defense stocks headquartered in the 32 North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) member countries across Europe and North America. NATO's portfolio includes more than 70 companies, and the largest position is under 9% of total assets. This makes the fund somewhat more diversified than SHLD above, even as it has a more narrowly focused geographical purview. NATO is also almost exclusively focused on industrials names, while SHLD gives over a portion of its portfolio to software and AI companies with defense interests as well. More than two-thirds of NATO's portfolio is made up of U.S. companies, with France and the U.K. making up the bulk of the remainder. NATO comes in ahead of SHLD when it comes to fees, as it has an expense ratio of just 0.35%. Having launched last October, it has a limited performance history, but it has generated returns of about 32% YTD. However, with an AUM of around $24 million and a one-month average trading volume hovering around 17,000, investors may find liquidity to be an issue here more so than for SHLD. High-Risk, High-Reward 3X Defense Leverage [content-module:CompanyOverview|NYSEARCA:DFEN] Direxion Daily Aerospace & Defense Bull 3X Shares Fund (NYSEARCA: DFEN) is a fund reserved for defense investors comfortable taking on a high degree of risk. This ETF provides an opportunity for investors anticipating a short-term rally in U.S. defense stocks, offering daily 3X leveraged exposure to a bucket of about 38 companies. Like SHLD above, DFEN is fairly concentrated, with the top two positions representing more than a quarter of assets invested. As with other leveraged funds, DFEN is not designed to be held longer than a single day of trading. This means it may be a viable option for investors holding one of the defense funds above long-term but seeking additional targeted exposure in anticipation of an intraday rally in this industry. Due to its leverage and unique focus, this fund has a higher expense ratio of 0.95%. It also has the highest degree of leverage available in defense ETFs, but there are alternatives providing 2X exposure for investors interested in taking on a more moderate degree of risk. Where Should You Invest $1,000 Right Now? Before you make your next trade, you'll want to hear this. MarketBeat keeps track of Wall Street's top-rated and best performing research analysts and the stocks they recommend to their clients on a daily basis. Our team has identified the five stocks that top analysts are quietly whispering to their clients to buy now before the broader market catches on... and none of the big name stocks were on the list. They believe these five stocks are the five best companies for investors to buy now...

Ukraine showed that drones are the new bullets. Why doesn't Canada get this?
Ukraine showed that drones are the new bullets. Why doesn't Canada get this?

Globe and Mail

timea day ago

  • Globe and Mail

Ukraine showed that drones are the new bullets. Why doesn't Canada get this?

Eliot Pence is the founder of Tofino Capital and the former head of international growth for Anduril Industries. Canada's Department of Munitions and Supply was established during the Second World War to secure a reliable domestic source of ammunition and other critical defence supplies, ensuring the country could support both Allied forces and its own military needs. In the 1970s, the department's successor, the Munitions Supply Program (MSP), sustained continuous domestic production capacity through long-term contracts with private industry, stabilizing employment and supply chain resilience while maintaining military readiness. Over the decades, the program expanded to cover a broad range of munitions, from small arms ammunition to artillery shells, and became a key component of Canada's defence industrial base, supporting both peacetime operations and contingency mobilizations. But now, the way we fight wars has changed. And Canada has no equivalent program for the modern equivalent of ammo: cheap, armed drones. Their power was evident on Sunday, when a cheaply made Ukrainian fleet destroyed or damaged nearly a third of Moscow's strategic bombers. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky called the operation one for the 'history books.' In Ukraine, first-person view (FPV) drones have shifted from novelty to necessity, shaping tactics, logistics and even battlefield outcomes in real time. Reports indicate that the country is producing approximately 100,000 drones monthly, with ambitions to scale up to 4.5 million annually this year. Notably, domestically produced drones accounted for more than 96 per cent of all unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) used by Ukrainian forces in 2024. Drones now account for as much as 80 per cent of battlefield casualties in the war with Russia – a staggering figure that underscores their role as the new artillery of modern conflict. Other countries have taken note, and begun to treat drones like they treat munitions. With more than one million registered drones, China has established a formidable drone industry. Its selective restrictions on drone component exports have impacted Ukraine's drone production capabilities, while continuing to supply Russia. Turkey and India treat drones as national enterprises. Baykar Technologies, Turkey's leading drone manufacturer, claims to command 65 per cent of the global armed drone market, with its flagship Bayraktar TB2 and Akinci drones exported to more than 30 countries, including fellow NATO members such as Poland and Romania. India, fresh off a brief but alarmingly volatile clash with Pakistan, plans to triple its UAV expenditure to US$500-million. The U.S. has taken important first steps, initiating the Replicator program, which aims to rapidly develop and deploy thousands of low-cost, expendable drones to maintain technological superiority. This initiative underscores the strategic importance of drone capabilities in modern defence planning. A night of fire with Ukraine's drone warriors Opinion: In Ukraine, the bold drone attacks against Russia are a rare chance for celebration The Defence Innovation Unit and the Marine Corps certified the first National Defence Authorization Act-compliant FPV drone on the Department of Defence's approved drone list in less than a year – a testament to how government and industry can move quickly when aligned. Scale is the next challenge. Drones – especially inexpensive ones – shouldn't be treated like traditional aircraft. They're closer to bullets than bombers: cheap, fast, disposable and essential for modern operations. Canada's defence procurement model is poorly suited to this new reality. We buy exquisite systems on decades-long timelines. But to meet the moment, we need to treat inexpensive drones like munitions: funded as recurring expenditures, stocked like ammo and procured with flexibility. This is where Canada's MSP offers a model. Under the program, the Department of National Defence ensures domestic production capacity for key munitions through long-term contracts and industry partnerships. This approach guarantees both readiness and sovereignty. An MSP for drones would fund Canadian manufacturers to produce inexpensive drones at scale, on a recurring basis; establish testing, compliance and training pathways for rapid deployment; and build domestic supply chains to avoid the bottlenecks that have hampered artillery production. The opportunity is here. The technology exists. Canada's tech ecosystem – startups, researchers and defence primes – can deliver if the government provides clear demand and stable funding. Canada once led the world in radar, communications and aerospace. Let's not miss the opportunity to lead in the drone era.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store