Jeff Bezos, owner of The Washington Post, has defended his controversial decision for his storied publication to end its decades-long tradition of endorsing a presidential candidate. Bezos penned an Op-Ed published by his newspaper Monday night, stating the internal decision to not endorse either Kamala Harris or Donald Trump for president was done in an effort to increase public trust. He said newspapers have the daunting task of not only producing accurate news but having the public believe what they produce is the truth. Endorsing a political candidate for president creates the image of bias, a perception of “non-independence,” he said.
“Ending them is a principled decision, and it's the right one,” he said. He added that doing away with the tradition may not significantly increase trust among readers but is “a meaningful step in the right direction.” In the Op-Ed, he acknowledged that they erred by not announcing their decision to do away with endorsing presidential candidates earlier.
“That was inadequate planning, and not some intentional strategy,” he said. Since The Post announced it was discarding presidential endorsements on Friday, it has been buffeted by criticism, dealt with resignations and has been reportedly inundated with canceled subscriptions. Editorial board members David Hoffman and Molly Roberts resigned in response to the move. In a statement, Roberts said it was Bezos' decision to not endorse a candidate and that it was the newspaper's “imperative to endorse Kamala Harris over Donald Trump.”
“Our silence is exactly what Donald Trump wants: for the media, for us, to keep quiet,” she said. Twenty-one columnists signed a letter on Friday calling the decision was “a terrible mistake,” one that “represents an abandonment of the fundamental editorial convictions of the newspaper that we love.” It has also been reported by NPR, citing two people at The Post with knowledge on the matter, that more than 200,000 people have canceled their digital subscription as of Monday in response.
Bezos Defends the Move, Acknowledges Backlash
Bezos, the second-richest man in the world, in a “note from the owner” late on October 28, said that editorial endorsements create a “perception of bias” and this was important “at a time many Americans don't believe the media”. Bezos has backed the move stating that ending endorsements is “a principled decision, and the right one”, AP reported. He added that he wished that the move was done earlier ... “in a moment further from the election and the emotions around it. That was inadequate planning, and not some intentional strategy.”
Bezos Denies Business Pressures Influenced Decision
Bezos also clarified that the decision was not informed by his other businesses, including Blue Origin, his aerospace manufacturer, while suggesting further changes at the newspaper might be in the pipeline to regain the public's trust. “To win this fight, we will have to exercise new muscles. Some changes will be a return to the past, and some will be new inventions. Criticism will be part and parcel of anything new, of course. This is the way of the world. None of this will be easy, but it will be worth it,” he said. Bezos, among the world's richest men, bought The Post for $250 million in 2013.
The Impact of the Decision
This is the second prominent newspaper after the Los Angeles Times that has now refrained from backing a presidential candidate this election cycle. The US elections are set to be held on November 5, next month. However, the move was not greeted well. As many as 200,000 readers canceled their subscriptions to the Washington Post, besides multiple long-time staff on the editorial board putting in their papers, it said. Notably, WaPo has 2.5 million (25 lakh subscribers) and is placed third behind the New York Times (NYT) and Wall Street Journal (WSJ) in terms of circulation. The subscription cancellations will thus pinch the publication, which gains much revenue from paid readers.
Bezos's Response to Criticisms
Bezos added that his wealth acts as a “bulwark” against intimidation of the newspaper but acknowledged that people may also view it as a “web of conflicting interests”. He, however,, claims to have never interfered in the Post's editorial choices and added that his “track record” since 2013 backs that up. “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. It hasn't happened,” he wrote. Adding that while he doesn't and won't push personal interests on the paper, he wouldn't allow it to “stay on autopilot and fade into irrelevance.” “Many of the finest journalists you'll find anywhere work at The Washington Post, and they work painstakingly every day to get to the truth. They deserve to be believed,” he said.
The Washington Post's Future
The Post's decision not to endorse a candidate has sparked a debate about the role of the press in a democracy. Some argue that the newspaper has a responsibility to endorse candidates, while others believe that it should remain neutral. The Post's decision is likely to have a significant impact on the newspaper's future, but it remains to be seen how the public will respond. Will The Post's decision lead to a greater loss in subscriptions? Will they be able to re-gain trust in the future, and restore their reputation? This is an unprecedented move that has caught the public's attention, and it will be interesting to see how it all unfolds.
