Jeff Bezos has addressed the uproar surrounding The Washington Post’s decision to refrain from endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris. In an extensive op-ed, Bezos maintained that the choice was not influenced by his business interests, arguing that endorsements create an appearance of bias.
Bezos stated that the decision to end the newspaper’s tradition of candidate endorsements was grounded in principles. He asserted that presidential endorsements do not sway undecided voters. Instead, they foster a perception of bias and lack of independence. He described the move as principled and correct.
Despite these claims, over 200,000 subscribers had canceled their digital subscriptions to The Washington Post by midday Monday. Bezos, who acquired the newspaper for $250 million in 2013, emphasized that there was no “quid pro quo” involved in the decision.
Jeff Bezos on why The Washington Post didn’t endorse a candidate:
“ What presidential endorsements actually do is create a perception of bias. A perception of non-independence. Ending them is a principled decision” pic.twitter.com/BEZbcHaoj0
— BuccoCapital Bloke (@buccocapital) October 29, 2024
The situation was further complicated when Dave Limp, CEO of Bezos’s company Blue Origin, met with Trump on the announcement day, prompting speculation about a deal to avoid endorsing Harris.
Bezos clarified that neither campaign was consulted about this decision, which was made internally. He expressed frustration over the timing, so close to the election, attributing it to inadequate planning rather than strategy.
Former Executive Editor Marty Baron expressed doubt about the decision in an NPR interview, suggesting it was not made with high principles in mind. The Post faced a “tidal wave” of cancellations, amounting to 8% of its 2.5 million subscriber base, including print.
Former Executive Editor Marcus Brauchli urged readers not to cancel their subscriptions, warning it could harm the quality journalism the Post offers. Post columnist Dana Milbank and others echoed this sentiment, fearing job losses.
The debate also saw an influx of comments on the Post’s website, with many readers announcing their departure. Bezos reiterated in his op-ed that his decisions regarding the newspaper are principled and separate from his other business interests.
Columnists have resigned in response to the fallout from the decision. The Washington Post’s British publisher, William Lewis, announced the paper’s return to its roots of not endorsing presidential candidates. An opinion piece by 20 columnists criticized this move as an abandonment of the paper’s editorial convictions.
The decision was criticized by a former executive editor, yet defended by the current publisher as consistent with the Post’s values. An article on the Post’s website revealed that an endorsement for Harris had been drafted but remained unpublished, with unidentified sources attributing the decision to Bezos.
Publisher Will Lewis described the decision as a return to a past tradition, emphasizing the paper’s belief in readers’ judgment. The decision caused unrest among opinion staff, who operate independently from newsroom staff.
Several columnists have resigned in protest. Robert Kagan, a conservative critic of Trump, left the editorial board, suggesting a deal with Trump. Michele Norris also departed, calling the decision a mistake.
The Washington Post Guild denounced the move, citing concerns over timing and its impact on the election. Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, renowned for uncovering Watergate, expressed disappointment, highlighting the paper’s strong investigative work under Bezos.
Bezos Defends Washington Post’s Move to Not Endorse a Presidential Candidate https://t.co/tcdXn5y1WE
— Rudy Salmon (@RudyChasal) October 29, 2024
Many liberal readers threatened to cancel subscriptions. The Post’s page editor, David Shipley, had reportedly approved the endorsement of Harris, but CEO Will Lewis announced the decision to cease endorsements in an op-ed.
The Post’s staff learned of the decision in a tense meeting, according to NPR. Shipley explained the decision aimed to create independent space for voters. However, NPR reported that Bezos ultimately made the call.
The controversy has led to a decline in reader trust and prompted criticisms from former executive editor Martin Baron. On Sunday, humor columnist Alexandra Petri expressed her endorsement for Kamala Harris, citing the importance of continuing elections.
What Other Media Are Saying
- Times of India: Jeff Bezos defends The Washington Post’s decision not to endorse, arguing it eliminates perception of bias, but critics see it as undermining democratic values and journalistic integrity.(read more)
- Variety: Jeff Bezos defends his decision to end The Washington Post’s presidential endorsements, citing unease about influencing elections, despite backlash from journalists and readers.(read more)
Frequently Asked Questions
Here are some common questions asked about this news
Why did The Washington Post stop endorsing candidates?
Jeff Bezos argued endorsements create an appearance of bias and don’t sway undecided voters.
Did Jeff Bezos influence The Washington Post’s decision not to endorse Kamala Harris?
Bezos stated there was no influence from his business interests in the decision.
How did subscribers react to The Washington Post’s decision on endorsements?
Over 200,000 subscribers canceled their digital subscriptions by midday Monday.
Was there a meeting between Blue Origin’s CEO and Trump related to this decision?
Yes, Dave Limp met with Trump, leading to speculation about a deal.
Did any staff resign over The Washington Post’s decision?
Yes, several columnists, including Robert Kagan and Michele Norris, resigned in protest.
