Employees outraged at ‘chicken-shit’ move that breaks 30-year precedent, alleging Jeff Bezos quashed Harris support

There was uproar and outrage among the Washington Post’s current and former staffers and other notable figures in the world of American media after the newspaper’s leaders on Friday chose to not endorse any candidate in the US presidential election.

The newspaper’s publisher, Will Lewis, announced on Friday that for the first time in over 30 years, the paper’s editorial board would not be endorsing a candidate in this year’s presidential election, nor in future presidential elections.

After the news broke, reactions came flooding in, with people criticizing the decision, which, according to some staffers and reporters, was allegedly made by the Post’s owner, billionaire Jeff Bezos.

Karen Attiah, a columnist for the Washington Post who writes a weekly newsletter, called the decision an “absolute stab in the back”.

  • dhork@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    76
    ·
    26 days ago

    I wonder if we’ll ever find out how many subscriptions they lost because of it.

      • ThirdWorldOrder@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        26 days ago

        Same! Now I have NYT only although they spam like crazy. Reuters is going sub now so I’ll prob pick them up since I’ve been enjoying their stuff for years now.

          • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            25 days ago

            There’s unbiased as in, “if two groups disagree, we won’t do anything to favour either side”.

            And then there unbiased as in, “we will report the facts as best as we can tell them, regardless of which sides, if any, those facts favour”.

            Reuters, as I understand it, is more the latter than the former. But too many major media organizations are the former.

            Whichever one of those definitions of “unbiased” you subscribe to, the other will seem biased, unless both sides are doing the same thing (eg both lying or both being honest and accurate).

          • ThirdWorldOrder@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            26 days ago

            Yeah but most times I just want the news and not the talking heads. I like Reuters on in the morning with a cup of coffee.

        • Telodzrum@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          26 days ago

          I still have my NYT sub, I’ll be switching to games only next year though. The EIC there is a real piece of shit.

          • Pips@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            26 days ago

            Said it in another post, but my main reason for keeping NYT is for their war and science reporting. There’s only a handful of decent outfits to get quality reporting on global conflict: Bellingcat, NYT, and War Nerd, among others. NYT probably has the best funding so they have a pretty far reach. I can’t think of another outfit that is actively reporting on Sudan, Bangladesh, Côte d’Ivoire, Central America, and a whole host of other areas.