He seems to equate a well reasoned argument with putting fingers in yourvearscand screaming "I CAN'T HEAR YOU," if not outright censorship. Harvard that.
All I said when I canceled my subscription was “Money is the only language Bezos understands so I’m switching to NY Times who endorsed in September.”
Unfortunate that WaPo will pay the price.
It’s sad that talented journalists have decided to leave the Washington Post. Others have decided to stay and have written columns criticizing Bezos’ decision. I’m a longtime subscriber and decided to keep my subscription because of the outstanding journalism should be supported.
It strikes me that Trump is getting a helping hand from many powerful (i.e. very rich) individuals. Are they lacking courage or morals or both? Many true colours being shown - I really hope good prevails and karma does its work on those who deserve a dose.
I only hope some really smart and ethical people find a way to create a truly independent, worker-run media organization that can rise up to replace the failing corporate media.
Disagree. You really DON'T need to do anything other than tell the truth.
Currently the GOP is digging itself into a hole. Look at the RNC.
Not endorsing anyone allows a paper to maintain an image of being impartial. But printing the truth at this point really just pushes people to vote Dem.
This is, fortunately, a prominent American with clear ethics. More of them; many, many more of them, need to speak out about the election choices from Pres to local Senators & Reps.
Is Bezos the villain? What influence is the newspaper likely to have on MAGA cultists? Exactly! Zero. If there was pressure applied to endorse Trump and the response is to refuse by endorsing no one, whilst continuing to investigate and report fearlessly, then isn’t democracy the better for that?
Bezos is the villain. Even if the pressure applied came from
Lewis (likely), Bezos was persuaded that non-comment was the right course and it was ultimately his decision. I doubt Fred Ryan would have ever agreed to a decision like this (or even advanced it as a spitball).
Whilst Marty Baron, the former editor of the Post slammed the decision, he also said: “Jeff Bezos stood behind us all the way. He endured a lot of pressure from Donald Trump, and Trump threatened his business, Amazon, and all of that. And he didn’t bend at all,” A track record in other words.
A track record that is now in the dust. The whole point of the track record was to establish that he wouldn't meddle with the Post, not to give him brownie points he could spend to meddle if he really, really wants to. Not interfering is the lowest possible standard, not worthy of commendation.
Democracy is not the better when a billionaire owner overrules the editorial board of the newspaper he owns on a core journalistic issue, regardless of the content of that overruling.
People of the “Far-Left” as Trump describes us in the UK, are acutely aware of the risks he poses within and without the borders of the USA. It is not clear that Bezos, if he has backed journalistic independence, as attributed, deserves the vitriol. You already know where the real danger lies.
I have to wonder if this was the goal, all along.
One of the first steps toward fascism and an oligarchy is to destroy and discredit legitimate journalism.
Why else would billionaires buy out major media?
As the saying goes, when one source says its raining outside & another says its sunny, journalism's duty is not to simply & obligingly report both sides (or only jthe side ownership wants it to be), but rather open the window, LOOK OUTSIDE, then report accordingly.
I liked that Jeff Bezos’s main argument was that despite all appearances to the contrary, there is no quid pro quo. So he’s giving us his word that everything is on the up and up, end of discussion.
Self-censoring might be good for the bottom line (though I think that's a serious miscalculation), but it definitely does not reflect "independent journalism".
So sad. The eloquence with which she supports the case for reasoned argument by quoting Aristotle brought a tear to my eye.
I hope her writing days aren't over.
And she was prescient in this! Bezos’ own article says essentially that in order to be believed, you have to capitulate to liars… completely ceding to mis/disinformation.
Comments
Seems to me she just nailed the tag line for a new publication.
Unfortunate that WaPo will pay the price.
Currently the GOP is digging itself into a hole. Look at the RNC.
Not endorsing anyone allows a paper to maintain an image of being impartial. But printing the truth at this point really just pushes people to vote Dem.
If you were sure you were right, it would not hurt to hear the other side of the argument.
Lewis (likely), Bezos was persuaded that non-comment was the right course and it was ultimately his decision. I doubt Fred Ryan would have ever agreed to a decision like this (or even advanced it as a spitball).
The idea that Bezos would *never* do something like this forget that Daenerys destroyed King’s Landing after its surrender. People change.
the fash stick together
As for journalistic independence, what he did here is the opposite of that. It is also not clear that this is the first time.
"The best support for your reader’s ability to make up their own minds is presentation of the best arguments."
Allen sets an excellent example.
One of the first steps toward fascism and an oligarchy is to destroy and discredit legitimate journalism.
Why else would billionaires buy out major media?
I hope her writing days aren't over.