Pentagon Appoints Public Affairs Official as Stars and Stripes Publisher
Left 50%
Center 0%
Right 50%
1 left · 0 center · 1 right
What happened
The Pentagon has appointed Chris Devine, a former Marine Corps colonel and executive director of the Department of Defense public affairs office, as acting publisher of Stars and Stripes, the U.S. military newspaper that has published continuously since World War II and describes itself as an independent news source for the military community governed by First Amendment principles. Devine will keep his Pentagon public affairs post and split time between the two roles until a permanent publisher is named. The appointment follows a January 2026 Pentagon announcement of plans to overhaul the paper, which the department funds at roughly half of the outlet’s annual budget, and the August firing of longtime publisher Max Lederer, editor-in-chief Erik Slavin, and Middle East reporter Lara Korte. A source familiar with the matter said the firings followed Slavin and Korte’s unauthorized participation in a CBS Sunday Morning segment about the overhaul and Lederer’s refusal to fire them at Pentagon direction; the Pentagon called the episode subordination. The three sued, alleging “imminent retaliation and termination in violation of their First Amendment and statutory rights,” and in September U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden denied a temporary restraining order, finding they “ultimately fail to carry their significant burden to show that they are clearly entitled to a preliminary injunction.”
Sourcing check · Fully on the record · 2 articles
2 of 2 articles cite a named source for the story. It was on the record from the first report.
What these terms mean and how they're counted
- On the record · names a source 2 of 2
- On the record means the article cites a source by name for the story's main claim: a person, or an institution speaking officially, such as a company statement or a named agency's spokesperson. The opposite is an unnamed source. The count is how many of the counted articles cite at least one such source; the names are everyone named across them, each once however the articles spell it. Here: Pentagon, Sean Parnell and Christian Devine
- Primary evidence · cites a document or data 0 of 2
- Primary evidence means the article cites a record you could check yourself: a court filing or ruling, a dataset or report, a recording or transcript, an official statement or press release, market data. A quote is not a document. The count is how many articles cite one. Here: None cited.
- Credits another outlet 0 of 2
- The article says the story comes from another outlet's reporting (“first reported by Reuters”). Those articles relay the story; they are not independent confirmation. Here: Each article presents its own reporting.
- Unnamed sources 0 of 2
- The main claim is attributed to people who are not identified: “people familiar with the matter”, “officials said”. The count is how many articles do this.
- How it developed
- When the first report landed and whether it named anyone; when the first named source and the first document appeared. Here: First report Oct 14, 12:33 UTC by The Hill, naming its source.
- Not counted 0
- Opinion, analysis and video pieces, and articles too short to assess. Every count above is out of the counted articles. An article republished under a new headline is one article.
This is about who is cited, not whether the story is true. Each source below says what it names. How we count
Omitted — what each side leaves out
Unpacked
The appointment is not a clean handoff, but left-leaning coverage never says so. Right-leaning coverage reports that Chris Devine will remain executive director in the Pentagon public affairs office and split time between that post and Stars and Stripes. Left-leaning coverage names him only as a former Marine colonel and a Defense public affairs official, so the conflict of holding both jobs never appears.
A second split sits in the language around the firings. Left-leaning coverage uses subordination to describe why three staffers lost their jobs at an independent paper. Right-leaning coverage instead quotes the Pentagon on cutting "woke distractions" from the same outlet.
Who has final say on Stars and Stripes stories while the acting publisher still holds his Pentagon public-affairs job?
Bottom line
Anyone who read only The Hill would think a former Marine was simply named acting publisher, not that he will keep running the Pentagon’s public affairs office at the same time.
The receipts — 3 facts one side's coverage lacks
- U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden denied a temporary restraining order seeking to reverse the firings
- The Pentagon funds roughly half of Stars and Stripes’ annual budget
- Fired publisher Max Lederer, editor-in-chief Erik Slavin, and reporter Lara Korte sued the Pentagon over their terminations
The Left View
Left-leaning coverage frames the story as the Pentagon tapping a Department of Defense public affairs official to run Stars and Stripes, presenting the paper as an “independent publication” and tying the appointment to the firing of three staffers for what the department called subordination.
The Right View
Right-leaning coverage casts the appointment as interim leadership for a Pentagon overhaul that spokesman Sean Parnell described as returning the paper to “its original mission: reporting for our warfighters,” modernizing it, and refocusing content “away from woke distractions that syphon morale” toward warfighting, weapons, fitness, lethality, and “ALL THINGS MILITARY,” with “no more repurposed DC gossip columns” or Associated Press reprints. The New York Post highlights Parnell’s claim that Devine brings “unmatched expertise” and a “commitment to ensuring Stars and Stripes maintains editorial independence while delivering exclusive, mission-focused reporting,” and treats the earlier firings and the denied injunction as the relevant backdrop.
Our Take (balanced)
The left’s strongest argument is structural: a newspaper that claims First Amendment independence is now headed, even on an interim basis, by a sitting Pentagon public-affairs official after its leadership was removed for defying the department. The right’s strongest argument is that a military-funded outlet can be redirected toward service members’ operational needs, that officials say independence will be maintained, and that a federal judge found the fired staffers had not met the burden for an injunction. The central unresolved tension is whether putting the Pentagon’s own public-affairs shop in the publisher’s chair is compatible with Stars and Stripes’ self-described status as an independent, First Amendment–governed newspaper.
2 sources
More stories
The week's bottom lines, in your inbox
One email a week: the five stories that mattered and what they actually mean. Free.