U.S. Department of War – Bias and Credibility

---

QUESTIONABLE SOURCE

A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency, and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for profit or influence (Learn More). Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be untrustworthy and should be fact-checked on a per-article basis. See all Questionable sources.

• Overall, we rate the Department of War as right-biased based on overt ideological framing, leadership-driven messaging, and systematic exclusion of dissenting or independent perspectives. We rate it Questionable and Mixed for factual reporting because, while some content reflects genuine government actions and official statements, the site frequently functions as a propaganda vehicle, relies on leadership with documented false claims, restricts press access, and amplifies narratives through ideologically aligned and unreliable media sources.

---

History

The Department of War publishes official government content on its website. According to its About page, the department was formerly known as the Department of Defense before a formal name change back to the Department of War under Executive Order 14347. The site functions as the official communications and public-facing outlet for U.S. military policy, operations, and leadership statements following the renaming.

Read our profile on the United States media and government.

Funded by / Ownership

The Department of War is a U.S. federal executive department funded entirely by taxpayer appropriations. For fiscal year 2026, the proposed national defense budget is approximately $1.01 trillion, including $848.3 billion in discretionary spending and $113.3 billion in mandatory funding. The proposed budget represents a 13.4 percent increase over fiscal year 2025. Estimated implementation costs for the department’s name change range from $10 million to $125 million.

Analysis / Bias

The Department of War website primarily serves as a government messaging platform. Content published on the site overwhelmingly reflects the ideological and policy positions of the sitting administration and senior leadership, with little to no attempt to present dissenting views, contextual criticism, or independent verification. Language frequently adopts celebratory, nationalistic, and adversarial framing consistent with political messaging rather than neutral public information.

For example, the article Trump Announces U.S. Military’s Capture of Maduro presents an extraordinary claim involving the capture of a foreign head of state and the U.S. assumption of governance in Venezuela. The piece relies exclusively on statements from President Donald Trump, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, and senior military officials, using highly emotive language such as “audacious,” “historic,” and “gallantry and glory,” without independent corroboration or acknowledgment of international law concerns or foreign government responses.

Similarly, official transcripts such as the Senior Defense Official Background Briefing on Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness present policy justifications, particularly regarding the separation of service members over gender dysphoria, without engaging with medical consensus, civil-rights critiques, or court challenges beyond procedural acknowledgments. The framing consistently echoes administration talking points centered on “warrior ethos” and readiness, reinforcing ideological messaging rather than balanced policy explanation.

Press access policies under Secretary of War Pete Hegseth further reinforce concerns about propaganda and information control. According to analysis in Pentagon rules for the press, new restrictions require journalists to agree to limits on newsgathering or lose Pentagon credentials, prompting walkouts by major news organizations. Coverage by AP News shows that press pool access has increasingly been granted to ideologically aligned or right-wing outlets with records of failed fact checks, while legacy and mainstream organizations have been excluded.

Leadership credibility is also a factor. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth has a documented record of making false or misleading claims, as cataloged in multiple entries on the Google Fact Check Explorer. The department’s reliance on such figures as primary and often sole sources further weakens the reliability of its communications.

Failed Fact Checks

• While the Department of War itself is not directly rated by fact-checking organizations, senior leadership, particularly Pete Hegseth, has been repeatedly flagged for false or misleading statements, as documented by multiple fact-checkers indexed through the Google Fact Check Explorer. Additionally, the department’s preferential inclusion of outlets with histories of failed fact-checks in the Pentagon press pool raises significant concerns about information integrity.

Overall, we rate the Department of War as right-biased based on overt ideological framing, leadership-driven messaging, and systematic exclusion of dissenting or independent perspectives. We rate it Questionable and Mixed for factual reporting because, while some content reflects genuine government actions and official statements, the site frequently functions as a propaganda vehicle, relies on leadership with documented false claims, restricts press access, and amplifies narratives through ideologically aligned and unreliable media sources. (D. Van Zandt 01/25/2026)

Source: https://www.war.gov/

Last Updated on January 25, 2026 by Media Bias Fact Check

---

Do you appreciate our work? Please consider one of the following ways to sustain us.

MBFC Ad-Free 

or

MBFC Donation

---

---

---

Left vs. Right Bias: How we rate the bias of media sources