Jeff Bezos has broken his silence following The Washington Post’s controversial decision to block an endorsement of Vice President Kamala Harris.
The billionaire insisted in a lengthy op-ed that the decision was not connected to his vast business interests while claiming endorsements ‘create a perception of bias.’
Bezos argued the newspaper’s ending its long-standing practice of endorsing a candidate is one based on principles.
‘Presidential endorsements do nothing to tip the scales of an election. No undecided voters in Pennsylvania are going to say, ‘I’m going with Newspaper A’s endorsement.’ None,’ Bezos wrote.
‘What presidential endorsements actually do is create a perception of bias. A perception of non-independence. Ending them is a principled decision, and it’s the right one.’
The owner of The Washington Post and former CEO of Amazon Jeff Bezos has broken his silence following the newspaper’s decision to block an endorsement of Vice President Kamala Harris for president
In a lengthy op-ed posted to the Post’s own website on Monday night, Bezos attempted to justify his publication’s position
Whether principled or not, more than 200,000 people canceled their digital subscriptions for the Washington Post by midday on Monday.
Bezos – who purchased The Post for $250 million in 2013 – was also at pains to point out that ‘no quid pro quo of any kind is at work here.’
Such a suggestion became easy to make after Dave Limp, the CEO of Blue Origin, Bezos rocket ship company, met with Trump on the day of the announcement.
To outsiders, it gave the idea that some sort of deal was being made whereby the Post would no longer move to endorse Harris for president.
‘Neither campaign nor candidate was consulted or informed at any level or in any way about this decision. It was made entirely internally,’ Bezos wrote.
‘I sighed when I found out, because I knew it would provide ammunition to those who would like to frame this as anything other than a principled decision. But the fact is, I didn’t know about the meeting beforehand.
‘Even Limp didn’t know about it in advance; the meeting was scheduled quickly that morning. There is no connection between it and our decision on presidential endorsements, and any suggestion otherwise is false.’
Bezos published a lengthy op-ed on Monday night explaining his newspaper’s decision not to endorse Kamala Harris for the election
Bezos suggested that there was no quid pro quo at work in the paper’s decision
Bezos lamented that he wished the paper had made the change many months ago and not so close to the date of the election.
He blames the decision on ‘inadequate planning, and not some intentional strategy.’
Former Executive Editor Marty Baron voiced skepticism in an interview on NPR on Monday.
‘If this decision had been made three years ago, two years ago, maybe even a year ago, that would’ve been fine,’ Baron said.
‘It’s a certainly reasonable decision. But this was made within a couple of weeks of the election, and there was no substantive serious deliberation with the editorial board of the paper. It was clearly made for other reasons, not for reasons of high principle.’
As a result of the decision the Post has suffered a ‘tidal wave’ of cancellations since the announcement was made, NPR explained.
The figure represents about 8 percent of the paper’s paid circulation of 2.5 million subscribers, which includes print as well.
The number of cancellations only continued to grow Monday afternoon.
‘It’s a colossal number,’ former Executive Editor Marcus Brauchli said to NPR. ‘The problem is, people don’t know why the decision was made. We basically know the decision was made but we don’t know what led to it.
Brauchli urged readers not to cancel their subscriptions.
‘It is a way to send a message to ownership but it shoots you in the foot if you care about the kind of in-depth, quality journalism like Post produces,’ he said.
‘There aren’t many organizations that can do what the does. The range and depth of reporting by the journalists is among the best in the world.’
Other journalists, including Post columnist Dana Milbank, urged readers not to express their anger at the decision by canceling subscriptions, for fear it could cost reporters or editors their jobs.
An article on the Post’s website about the fallout from the non-endorsement had more than 2,000 comments, many of them from readers saying they were leaving.
‘I am unsubscribing after 70 years,’ wrote one commenter, claiming to have lost hope and belief that the Post would publish the truth.
In Monday night’s op-ed Bezos continued to state how decisions he makes involving the newspaper and ‘principled’ and nothing to do with his other companies or investments.
‘You can see my wealth and business interests as a bulwark against intimidation, or you can see them as a web of conflicting interests,’ he wrote.
‘Only my own principles can tip the balance from one to the other. I assure you that my views here are, in fact, principled, and I believe my track record as owner of The Post since 2013 backs this up.
‘You are of course free to make your own determination, but I challenge you to find one instance in those 11 years where I have prevailed upon anyone at The Post in favor of my own interests.’
The Washington Post has announced it will not endorse a presidential candidate, sparking fury among its liberal readers who are pledging to cancel their subscriptions to the paper
A series columnists have also resigned from the Washington Post in recent days as the paper deals with the fallout of owner Jeff Bezos’s decision to block a prepared endorsement of Vice President Kamala Harris for president.
In a post on Friday, William Lewis, the British publisher and chief executive officer of the newspaper said it would not be making an endorsement of a presidential candidate in the November 5 election, nor in any future presidential election.
‘We are returning to our roots of not endorsing presidential candidates,’ Lewis wrote.
‘The Washington Post’s decision not to make an endorsement in the presidential campaign is a terrible mistake,’ wrote 20 columnists in an opinion piece on the Post’s own website, adding that it ‘represents an abandonment of the fundamental editorial convictions of the newspaper that we love.
‘This is a moment for the institution to be making clear its commitment to democratic values, the rule of law and international alliances, and the threat that Donald Trump poses to them—the precise points The Post made in endorsing Trump’s opponents in 2016 and 2020,’ the columnists wrote.
The decision was immediately condemned by a former executive editor but one that the current publisher insisted was ‘consistent with the values the Post has always stood for.’
Sources told the Post reporters that Amazon billionaire and Washington Post owner Jeff Bezos made the decision
In an article posted on the front of its website, the Washington Post – reporting on its own inner workings – also quoted unidentified sources within the publication as saying that an endorsement of Harris over Trump had been written but not published.
Those sources told the Post reporters that Amazon billionaire and Washington Post owner Jeff Bezos made the decision.
The Post’s publisher, Will Lewis, wrote in a column that the decision was actually a return to a tradition the paper had years ago of not endorsing candidates.
He said it reflected the paper’s faith in ‘our readers’ ability to make up their own minds.’
‘We recognize that this will be read in a range of ways, including as a tacit endorsement of one candidate, or as a condemnation of another, or as an abdication of responsibility. That is inevitable,’ Lewis wrote.
The paper’s page editor David Shipley had already approved an endorsement of Harris
The Washington Post has decided not to endorse either candidate running for president
‘We don’t see it that way. We see it as consistent with the values the Post has always stood for and what we hope for in a leader: character and courage in service to the American ethic, veneration for the rule of law, and respect for human freedom in all its aspects.’
The Post said the decision had ‘roiled’ many on the opinion staff, which operates independently from the Post’s newsroom staff – what is known commonly in the industry as a ‘church-state separation’ between those who report the news and those who write opinion.
Several other longtime columnists have resigned in disgust at the decision to pull any endorsement.
Ex-editor at large and longtime columnist Robert Kagan, a conservative Trump critic, resigned from his position in the editorial board after the decision emerged.
The Washington Post’s British publisher Will Lewis rejected claims that Bezos was involved in the endorsement decision
Kagan suggested Bezos had set up a deal with Bezos and his space company Blue Origin.
‘We are in fact bending the knee to Donald Trump because we’re afraid of what he will do,’ Kagan said on CNN.
Another columnist, Michele Norris, walked out the door on Sunday writing on X that the decision not to endorse was a ‘terrible mistake’.
‘The Posts decision to withhold an endorsement that had been written & approved in an election where core democratic principles are at stake was a terrible mistake & an insult to the paper’s own longstanding standard.’
The response from the Post’s staff has been ‘uniformly outraged,’ according to NPR’s David Folkenflik.
The Washington Post Guild issued a statement denouncing the move.
‘We are deeply concerned that The Washington Post would make the decision to no longer endorse presidential candidates, especially a mere 11 days ahead of an immensely consequential election,’ it read.
Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, the famous Washington Post reporters who uncovered Watergate, slammed the paper’s decision not to endorse a presidential candidate
‘We respect the traditional independence of the editorial page, but this decision 11 days out from the 2024 presidential election ignores the Washington Post’s own overwhelming reportorial evidence on the threat Donald Trump poses to democracy,’ Woodward and Bernstein wrote in a statement
The two infamous Washington Post reporters who uncovered Watergate also slammed the paper’s decision not to endorse a candidate.
Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein released a joint statement to CNN in which they expressed their disappointment in the Post’s decision.
It said: ‘We respect the traditional independence of the editorial page, but this decision 11 days out from the 2024 presidential election ignores the Washington Post’s own overwhelming reportorial evidence on the threat Donald Trump poses to democracy.
‘Under Jeff Bezos’s ownership, the Washington Post’s news operation has used its abundant resources to rigorously investigate the danger and damage a second Trump presidency could cause to the future of American democracy.
‘That makes this decision even more surprising and disappointing, especially this late in the electoral process.’
Woodward and Bernstein became legends in the world of journalism after they broke Watergate – a sordid political scandal that involved the Nixon administration and his re-election campaign.
Thanks to the pair’s investigative reporting, the true extent of Watergate was uncovered, and Nixon was ultimately forced to resign from office.
Woodward and Bernstein became legends in the world of journalism after they exposed Watergate – a sordid political scandal that involved the Nixon administration and his re-election campaign
Woodward and Bernstein aren’t the only ones who are frustrated with the Post’s decision, though.
Many of the outlet’s liberal readers are now pledging to cancel their subscriptions.
The paper’s page editor David Shipley had already approved an endorsement of Harris and had reportedly told colleagues that it was being reviewed by the paper’s owner Jeff Bezos, according to NPR.
But on Friday CEO Will Lewis published an op-ed that the paper is returning to its ‘roots of not endorsing presidential candidates.’
Columnist Robert Kagan, a conservative Trump critic, resigned from his position in the editorial board after the decision emerged. Another columnist, Michele Norris, walked out the door on Sunday writing on X that the decision not to endorse was a ‘terrible mistake’
The paper’s staff learned of the decision from page editor Shipley in a ‘tense’ meeting on Friday, according to NPR.
Shipley told staff he owned the decision and it was meant to create ‘independent space’ where the paper does not tell people how to vote.
However, The Post itself has reported that it was Bezos who made the decision to not endorse a presidential candidate.
‘The role of an Editorial Board is to do just this: to share opinions on the news impacting our society and culture and endorse candidates to help guide readers… The message from our chief executive, Will Lewis — not from the Editorial Board itself — makes us concerned that management interfered with the work of our members in Editorial
‘According to our own reporters and Guild members, an endorsement for Harris was already drafted, and the decision to not to publish was made by The Post’s owner, Jeff Bezos.
‘We are already seeing cancellations from once loyal readers. This decision undercuts the work of our members at a time when we should be building our readers’ trust, not losing it.’
Former Post executive editor Martin Baron said: ‘This is cowardice, a moment of darkness that will leave democracy as a casualty. Donald Trump will celebrate this as an invitation to further intimidate The Post’s owner, Jeff Bezos (and other media owners).
‘History will mark a disturbing chapter of spinelessness at an institution famed for courage.’
The Washington Post’s humor columnist, Alexandra Petri, has written a column in which she shares her own endorsement for Kamala Harris after the newspaper withheld is planned endorsement of the Democratic candidate
On Sunday The Washington Post’s humor columnist penned her own column in which she shared her personal endorsement for Kamala Harris.
Alexandra Petri, who is described as being a writer with ‘a lighter take on the news and opinions of the day’ outlined her choice in her column on Saturday.
‘I would be a little embarrassed that it has fallen to me, the humor columnist, to make our presidential endorsement. I will spare you the suspense: I am endorsing Kamala Harris for president, because I like elections and want to keep having them,’ Petri wrote.
‘I’m just a humor columnist. I only know what’s happening because our actual journalists are out there reporting, knowing that their editors have their backs, that there’s no one too powerful to report on, that we would never pull a punch out of fear.
‘…if we think Trump should not return to the White House and Harris would make a fine president, we’re going to be able to say so. That’s why I, the humor columnist, am endorsing Kamala Harris by myself!’ she added.
