WaPo - No endorsement for the Presidency
-
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/10/25/washington-post-endorsement/
William Lewis is publisher and chief executive officer of The Washington Post.
The Washington Post will not be making an endorsement of a presidential candidate in this election. Nor in any future presidential election. We are returning to our roots of not endorsing presidential candidates.
As our Editorial Board wrote in 1960:
“The Washington Post has not ‘endorsed’ either candidate in the presidential campaign. That is in our tradition and accords with our action in five of the last six elections. The unusual circumstances of the 1952 election led us to make an exception when we endorsed General Eisenhower prior to the nominating conventions and reiterated our endorsement during the campaign. In the light of hindsight we retain the view that the arguments for his nomination and election were compelling. But hindsight also has convinced us that it might have been wiser for an independent newspaper in the Nation's Capital to have avoided formal endorsement.”
The Editorial Board made two other points — ahead of an election that John F. Kennedy won — that will resonate with readers today:
“The election of 1960 is certainly as important as any held in this century. This newspaper is in no sense noncommittal about the challenges that face the country. As our readers will be aware, we have attempted to make clear in editorials our conviction that most of the time one of the two candidates has shown a deeper understanding of the issues and a larger capacity for leadership.”
However, it concluded:
“We nevertheless adhere to our tradition of non-endorsement in this presidential election. We have said and will continue to say, as reasonably and candidly as we know how, what we believe about the emerging issues of the campaign. We have sought to arrive at our opinions as fairly as possible, with the guidance of our own principles of independence but free of commitment to any party or candidate.”
And again in 1972, the Editorial Board posed, and then answered this critical question ahead of an election which President Richard M. Nixon won: “In talking about the choice of a President of the United States, what is a newspaper’s proper role? … Our own answer is that we are, as our masthead proclaims, an independent newspaper, and that with one exception (our support of President Eisenhower in 1952), it has not been our tradition to bestow formal endorsement upon presidential candidates. We can think of no reason to depart from that tradition this year.”That was strong reasoning, but in 1976 for understandable reasons at the time, we changed this long-standing policy and endorsed Jimmy Carter as president. But we had it right before that, and this is what we are going back to.
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. 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. We also see it as a statement in support of our readers’ ability to make up their own minds on this, the most consequential of American decisions — whom to vote for as the next president.
Our job at The Washington Post is to provide through the newsroom nonpartisan news for all Americans, and thought-provoking, reported views from our opinion team to help our readers make up their own minds.
Most of all, our job as the newspaper of the capital city of the most important country in the world is to be independent.
And that is what we are and will be. -
The newsroom then prints a story expose on why they didn’t make an endorsement, LOL!
https://www.washingtonpost.com/style/media/2024/10/25/washington-post-endorsement-president/
By Manuel Roig-Franzia and Laura Wagner
Updated October 25, 2024 at 4:20 p.m. EDT|Published October 25, 2024 at 1:09 p.m. EDT
The Washington Post’s publisher announced Friday that it will not make an endorsement in this year’s presidential contest, for the first time in 36 years, or in future presidential races.
The decision, 11 days before an election that most polls show as too close to call, marks the second time this week that a major media organization has declined to issue an endorsement in the race between the Republican nominee, former president Donald Trump, and his Democratic opponent, Vice President Kamala Harris, after years of making such endorsements. Earlier this week, Patrick Soon-Shiong, the billionaire owner of the Los Angeles Times, blocked a planned endorsement of Harris, prompting the resignation of the newspaper’s editorials editor.An endorsement of Harris had been drafted by Post editorial page staffers but had yet to be published, according to two sources who were briefed on the sequence of events and who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly. The decision to no longer publish presidential endorsements was made by The Post’s owner, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos. “This was a Washington Post decision to not endorse, and I would refer you to the publisher’s statement in full,” said Chief Communications Officer Kathy Baird.“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),” former Post executive editor Martin Baron, who led the paper while Trump was president, said in a text message to The Post. “History will mark a disturbing chapter of spinelessness at an institution famed for courage.” -
Same day, different paper...
-
It’s an about AWS. AWS is a huge government contractor and has made heavy investments that a new executive could wipe out if he so chooses.
-
I guess he regrets buying WaPo now. At the time it probably seemed like an easy way to posture as being on the right side of history, with the positive PR that brought. But now, when it comes time to make an actual sacrifice for political ideals, the ideals are kicked to the curb. What a shock.
Anybody who links WaPo articles going forward, is complicit in fascism.
-
@LuFins-Dad said in WaPo - No endorsement for the Presidency:
It’s an about AWS.
Democracy dies in data centers.
-
@Horace said in WaPo - No endorsement for the Presidency:
Anybody who links WaPo articles going forward, is complicit in fascism.
I subscribed to the Washington Post for over 40 years.
For the last 5 years (2015-20) that I was a subscriber the front page had at least 1 or 2 anti-Trump stories every day.
That is what their readership wanted. I mostly just wanted local sports and business.
-
Isn't WaPo losing money?
-
Always remember, Operation Valkyrie was an act of sedition.
Warning: I post things that interest me. Read and comment at your own discretion. -
Hay, Jen!
-
I am really enjoying the meltdown over this. First, have any of the newspaper endorsements made a difference in the last 40 years? My guess is not on the presidential ticket. Possibly a few of the downballot stuff, but not the top of the ticket. Second, WaPo gave their endorsement by immediately posting a news story about how their endorsement of Kamala was hijacked by Bezos. Third, can there be any question based on their reporting on who they support? Fourth, the people complaining were already committed to their vote in 2021-2022, and probably well before. Mark Hamill, Olbermann, Stephen King, all of them can just mark down the D on their election ballots for the rest of their lives.
They are all bitching just because their personal wishes weren’t affirmed. Hilarious.
-
-
I have been enjoying Matt Taibbi- https://www.racket.news/p/note-on-the-washington-posts-non
Around this time last night I read the Levitsky/Ziblatt New York Times editorial about the “Fifth Choice” for stopping Trump, which read like a clarion call to ignore coming bad election news. On the heels of weeks of other catastrophizing editorials, it came as a shock.
Now word comes about stunning industry news of another sort. The Los Angeles Times and the Washington Post have declined to endorse either Kamala Harris or Donald Trump, which in the case of the Bezos Post especially reads like a decision to surrender to coming bad election news. The Post has been the tip of the anti-Trump spear for years, and with the Times led the movement to openly politicize journalism via its insufferably self-congratulating “Democracy Dies in Darkness” campaign, so bowing out of the open advocacy game with publisher William Lewis promising a return to the paper’s “roots” is beyond surprising. Editor-at-large Robert Kagan, who penned last year’s million-word “Calling All Hinckleys” editorial comparing Trump to Julius Caesar, resigned in protest, presumably to spend more time snuggling with spouse Victoria Nuland.
The 16,000 or so comments under the Lewis editorial so far reveal two things. Post readers prefer the more traditionally British double-L spelling of “cancelled.” Also, many readers noticed with chagrin the contrast with the Times piece:
ve heard so many crazy things in the last weeks about behind-the-scenes maneuvering in Washington that it’s been tough to know what to believe, but it’s clear we’re headed for some kind of historic confrontation. I have trouble believing institutional America will really reverse course after eight years of dystopian lunacy, but Bezos and the Post just changed something, probably over the passionate objections of 98% of staff. Whatever’s going on, it sure isn’t boring.
-
I think the government contract/Amazon Services contract probably weighed heavily in Bezos' decision making process.
But, allow me to dream a bit...What if...
What if the newspaper based in the nation's capitol actually decided to play it a bit more down the middle? Go back to the Who, What, When, Where and Why of reporting for most stories and try to present a robust comment section with differing viewpoints? Maybe do some investigative journalism on all things Federal government...Regardless of who occupies the Whitehouse or controls Congress?
Appeal to the broadest segment of Americans, the 60% in the middle of the electorate?
With the Amazon tie-in, make WaPo part of your Prime subscription. As people go back to work in their offices, maybe they start to talk about what WaPo published today, rather than what they read on X or watched on TikTok.
