So, the WaPo finally "said" the quiet part out loud or put a very large exclamation point on it. Something that has been evident in its daily coverage for some time. "Our owner is losing money and to make certain he doesn't lose too much more with this newspaper and his other interests in future, we will delusionally seek a mythical middle ground in our editorial approach. We're sorry you feel a clear and present threat to democracy is more important than that."
This was exactly what puzzled me! There has to be another facet to this.
Bezos has to know Trump's little🍄 syndrome will compel him to do everything he can to destroy Bezos's public image as a savvy mogul.
Do they listen to that stupid scorpion tale he repeats ad nauseum? Even if it kills him, he can't stop himself from being a vindictive little venomous worm trying to destroy anyone who garners honest respect in any form.
There is a long line of people who tried to appease him and he has pushed them onto the tracks at the first opportunity.
My father escaped the Holocaust. My mother's family got out before their country was occupied. I think about my great-grandmother (a midwife) who died in the gas chambers as did her sister. I imagine myself choking to death inside. In Trump's America, it won't be gas chambers and it probably won't be Jews. The question, fellow Americans, do you condemn immigrants to a similar fate? And, if so, how do you call yourself human?
Dude lost any possible semblance of credibility by instituting this "policy" after the editorial had been written.
I know that canceling my subscription hurts the journalists more than it hurts Jeff Bezos, but I am taking a cue from Gene and standing on principle. I am certain that the number of cancellations far exceeds the 2000 that was reported early yesterday. I want that number to be big and I want some people there to pay attention.
The truth is that my subscription wouldn't renew until next May, so I have the Post anyway, and TBH it's entirely likely that I end up resubscribing next spring. But I had to add my cancellation to the numbers they are seeing.
No, this one's all mine. And given that he's the only child of an only son, he has no close Barnhill relatives. But Barney is not an unusual nickname for a Barnhill (his father was called that as well). Barnhills are pretty thick on the ground here in Baldwin County, thanks to a progenitor who had a dozen offspring, but we're not related to any of them (not that we can prove, anyway--though all Barnhills seem to have come from Scotland to the Carolinas about the same time, early nineteenth century), but in general they're rare enough that I often have to spell my name despite its seeming simplicity.
I am completely shocked and saddened, not only by this decision my the Post leaders (owners? Pussies?), but am standing by my subscription because I respect the reporters who are still holding on there. I know I spend way too many of my retirement dollars to support a number of national and local journalism products, including the so-very-important Style Invitational (even though I never, ever get any ink).
I’m with you on that. I, too was going to cancel my subscription, but more lost revenue means fewer opportunities for journalists. The Post as an institution is not what it was, but there are still fine people doing good work. Its national and international reporting is still strong even if local coverage blows chunks.
The local reporters are not the problem, I should add, just the lack of resources devoted to it.
I have an ultra-cheap Educators subscription. I will not cancel it as long as Petri, Sietsema, and Hax are still employed. If they go, so does my meager $8 a month.
Click CANCEL and you'll see your renewal date. In my case, with an annual plan, I cancel and still have access until May. I've sent the message but have 7 months to cancel the cancellation.
Peter, with the power vested in me by me, I hereby award you an honorary Ink. Unfortunately, this has about the same comparative value as one of those movie industry awards for longevity, or simply hanging around Hollywood long enough, versus actually doing something Oscar-worthy.
With heavy heart, I will not renew my WaPo subscription. I was already disgusted by the right wing-nuts who write so many of their op-eds. But this was too far. Wimping out at this historic moment has turned WaPo into a Murdoch-adjacent rag. RIP WaPo. (Thanks for the great words about Katherine Graham—one of the great lights in publishing history.)
I half-heartedly defended the Post decision yesterday. I’ve changed my mind— I had assumed there was some sort of reasoning besides “Bezos told us to”, and there wasn’t. And mostly because of what you’ve written here, Gene. I concede the difference between now and the paper of Katherine Graham is really stark and really grim.
In my 17 years at the Post, I have never received as many reader emails and concerned text messages from friends as I have this week, after my employer announced it would not be endorsing a presidential candidate.
I cannot and will not tell folks what do to with their subscriptions. I know and understand how angry people are, and believe me when I tell you that the anger is felt within the building, too. I will, however, say this: The news side and the opinion side of the Post are completely separate. My political-reporter colleagues continue to perform dogged, in-depth accountability reporting about the presidential election on a daily basis. They are never told what they can and cannot report, and they do what they do better than anyone in the country. As a columnist on the news side who focuses on gender-related topics, I have written many, many critical columns analyzing Trump's behavior toward women, the numerous sexual assault allegations against him, and the trials in which he has been found legally liable for sexual abuse. Editors have only ever encouraged me to do this kind of work.
Again, do what feel you need to do with your subscription money. But the Washington Post is more than one man. There are hundreds of us there working our tails off every day because we truly believe that creating an informed citizenry is our calling and our privilege.
I was reading another Substack which asked the question, Why does the media play up any minor slip by Kamala (& before her, Biden), but barely note the horrible things that Trump spouts. Here is the answer in a nutshell: If Kamala wins, no problem; the media is safe. But if Trump wins, any negative will be reason to destroy the source. So WaPo & LA Times are being “rational.” Their lack of guts will not be held against them in a Harris Administration—they’ll get their seats in the WH Briefing Room, etc. but in a Trump Administration, they will be banished at best and shut down at worst, if it can be shown they were “disloyal.” You will never hear either WaPo or LA Times utter the phrase “death before dishonor.”
So, the WaPo finally "said" the quiet part out loud or put a very large exclamation point on it. Something that has been evident in its daily coverage for some time. "Our owner is losing money and to make certain he doesn't lose too much more with this newspaper and his other interests in future, we will delusionally seek a mythical middle ground in our editorial approach. We're sorry you feel a clear and present threat to democracy is more important than that."
We join you in your depression, Gene.
Thanks, Patty, and welcome aboard.
Bezos is smart enough to be a billionaire, but he thinks Trump won't come after him anyway?
Quoting Rick Wilson: "The irony of Bezos making this cowardly move is that Trump will show him no gratitude, no mercy, and no favor."
This was exactly what puzzled me! There has to be another facet to this.
Bezos has to know Trump's little🍄 syndrome will compel him to do everything he can to destroy Bezos's public image as a savvy mogul.
Do they listen to that stupid scorpion tale he repeats ad nauseum? Even if it kills him, he can't stop himself from being a vindictive little venomous worm trying to destroy anyone who garners honest respect in any form.
There is a long line of people who tried to appease him and he has pushed them onto the tracks at the first opportunity.
Knowing Demento, at a minimum it would be categorized as "protection money."
My father escaped the Holocaust. My mother's family got out before their country was occupied. I think about my great-grandmother (a midwife) who died in the gas chambers as did her sister. I imagine myself choking to death inside. In Trump's America, it won't be gas chambers and it probably won't be Jews. The question, fellow Americans, do you condemn immigrants to a similar fate? And, if so, how do you call yourself human?
Check out Jason Ng who died at the Wyatt Detention Center in Central Falls RI
Dude lost any possible semblance of credibility by instituting this "policy" after the editorial had been written.
I know that canceling my subscription hurts the journalists more than it hurts Jeff Bezos, but I am taking a cue from Gene and standing on principle. I am certain that the number of cancellations far exceeds the 2000 that was reported early yesterday. I want that number to be big and I want some people there to pay attention.
The truth is that my subscription wouldn't renew until next May, so I have the Post anyway, and TBH it's entirely likely that I end up resubscribing next spring. But I had to add my cancellation to the numbers they are seeing.
I'd already cancelled during the "we don't understand humor" debacles [eff the idiots on the death of the SI and eff the non-chef Padma Lakshmi].
I voted for Ayckroyd and Belushi, but if the choice had been limited to a single performer, it would have been Radner.
I do miss her.
Same here.
Hey I worked with an editorial aide named Barney Barnhill at the WaPo back in the early 90s! Any relation? 🤓
No, this one's all mine. And given that he's the only child of an only son, he has no close Barnhill relatives. But Barney is not an unusual nickname for a Barnhill (his father was called that as well). Barnhills are pretty thick on the ground here in Baldwin County, thanks to a progenitor who had a dozen offspring, but we're not related to any of them (not that we can prove, anyway--though all Barnhills seem to have come from Scotland to the Carolinas about the same time, early nineteenth century), but in general they're rare enough that I often have to spell my name despite its seeming simplicity.
If there is an afterlife, Adnan Khoshoggi must be shaking his head at Jeff Bezos.
Jamal.
I am completely shocked and saddened, not only by this decision my the Post leaders (owners? Pussies?), but am standing by my subscription because I respect the reporters who are still holding on there. I know I spend way too many of my retirement dollars to support a number of national and local journalism products, including the so-very-important Style Invitational (even though I never, ever get any ink).
I’m with you on that. I, too was going to cancel my subscription, but more lost revenue means fewer opportunities for journalists. The Post as an institution is not what it was, but there are still fine people doing good work. Its national and international reporting is still strong even if local coverage blows chunks.
The local reporters are not the problem, I should add, just the lack of resources devoted to it.
I have an ultra-cheap Educators subscription. I will not cancel it as long as Petri, Sietsema, and Hax are still employed. If they go, so does my meager $8 a month.
Click CANCEL and you'll see your renewal date. In my case, with an annual plan, I cancel and still have access until May. I've sent the message but have 7 months to cancel the cancellation.
Peter, with the power vested in me by me, I hereby award you an honorary Ink. Unfortunately, this has about the same comparative value as one of those movie industry awards for longevity, or simply hanging around Hollywood long enough, versus actually doing something Oscar-worthy.
I voted already (both 2024 elections and the SNL thing).
I voted for Aykroyd and Belushi and then realized I was wearing my Blues Brothers t-shirt.
Radner and Murray was weighed down by Murray’s nastiness. Radner and Curtain would have been a better pairing.
Yes!
Yes! And in that case - I would have voted Radner-Curtain for sure.
With heavy heart, I will not renew my WaPo subscription. I was already disgusted by the right wing-nuts who write so many of their op-eds. But this was too far. Wimping out at this historic moment has turned WaPo into a Murdoch-adjacent rag. RIP WaPo. (Thanks for the great words about Katherine Graham—one of the great lights in publishing history.)
It is betrayal, nothing less. I thought Bezos aspired to lead. Boy, was I mistaken. Coward does not even begin to cover this spinelessness.
I half-heartedly defended the Post decision yesterday. I’ve changed my mind— I had assumed there was some sort of reasoning besides “Bezos told us to”, and there wasn’t. And mostly because of what you’ve written here, Gene. I concede the difference between now and the paper of Katherine Graham is really stark and really grim.
That’s why media shouldn’t be owned by billionaires with everything to lose. Talk about cowering in the shadows!
Monica Hesse has an exceptional post on her FB:
https://www.facebook.com/monica.hesse.7
Hi Friends:
In my 17 years at the Post, I have never received as many reader emails and concerned text messages from friends as I have this week, after my employer announced it would not be endorsing a presidential candidate.
I cannot and will not tell folks what do to with their subscriptions. I know and understand how angry people are, and believe me when I tell you that the anger is felt within the building, too. I will, however, say this: The news side and the opinion side of the Post are completely separate. My political-reporter colleagues continue to perform dogged, in-depth accountability reporting about the presidential election on a daily basis. They are never told what they can and cannot report, and they do what they do better than anyone in the country. As a columnist on the news side who focuses on gender-related topics, I have written many, many critical columns analyzing Trump's behavior toward women, the numerous sexual assault allegations against him, and the trials in which he has been found legally liable for sexual abuse. Editors have only ever encouraged me to do this kind of work.
Again, do what feel you need to do with your subscription money. But the Washington Post is more than one man. There are hundreds of us there working our tails off every day because we truly believe that creating an informed citizenry is our calling and our privilege.
I was reading another Substack which asked the question, Why does the media play up any minor slip by Kamala (& before her, Biden), but barely note the horrible things that Trump spouts. Here is the answer in a nutshell: If Kamala wins, no problem; the media is safe. But if Trump wins, any negative will be reason to destroy the source. So WaPo & LA Times are being “rational.” Their lack of guts will not be held against them in a Harris Administration—they’ll get their seats in the WH Briefing Room, etc. but in a Trump Administration, they will be banished at best and shut down at worst, if it can be shown they were “disloyal.” You will never hear either WaPo or LA Times utter the phrase “death before dishonor.”
FYI, I'll be using this link to the Post editorial that endorsed Hillary in 2016 and also, in an embedded link, made the case against Trump.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/hillary-clinton-for-president/2016/10/12/665f9698-8caf-11e6-bf8a-3d26847eeed4_story.html
Here's 2020 for Biden with much of the same warnings about Trump.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/09/28/editorial-board-endorsement-joe-biden/?arc404=true