To play Devils Advocate for a moment: Why do we need, or even want, a newspaper to endorse a President? How does it not undermine a paper's journalistic ethics to be neutral and fair?
[flagged]
Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris
171–180 of 1001 posts
Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris
#172Good because newspapers should not be endorsing candidates.
This is probably the most important topic here. It reveals their bias/partisonship and turns the whole newspaper into an opinion piece
Consider the editorial board to be the equivalent of Fox's Opinion shows. They opinion side if the house is nominally independent from the News-gathering operations. If you're arguing purveyors of news should not carey opinion-pieces l, you may be a few centuries too late.
Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris
#173More interesting to me is that this is the third tech billionaire to take a decidedly different stance than he did previously. Musk is quite active, but even Zuckerberg took a much more neutral stance for 2024. Honestly I'm more surprised that Bezos even bothered. Does he really think the endorsement of The Washington Post editorial board is so significant that it's worth intervening? That seems implausible.
[flagged]
Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris
#174Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Taylor Swift is a billionaire from record and concert ticket sales alone. Between that and her endorsement of Harris, we're lucky to have one billionaire out there with legitimate wealth, unafraid to use it to effect positive change.
She came from wealth, dude, her parents manufactured her success at a young age. Did you seriously listen to that music and think it was grassroots success from raw talent?
Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris
#175Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris
#176To play Devils Advocate for a moment: Why do we need, or even want, a newspaper to endorse a President? How does it not undermine a paper's journalistic ethics to be neutral and fair?
I don't know for sure, but I suspect that this phenomenon of news media endorsing political candidates is almost entirely unique to the US. Please prove me wrong.
I can't prove you wrong, but I think political alignment of newspapers come in many flavors. Many countries have more parties than two, and as the choice ls less binary, the endorsements can be more subtle.
Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris
#177More interesting to me is that this is the third tech billionaire to take a decidedly different stance than he did previously. Musk is quite active, but even Zuckerberg took a much more neutral stance for 2024. Honestly I'm more surprised that Bezos even bothered. Does he really think the endorsement of The Washington Post editorial board is so significant that it's worth intervening? That seems implausible.
Zuckerberg has never been not right wing though.
Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris
#178Earlier quoted context omitted.
All signs point to this being an extraordinarily tight election. 5 or 10k votes in the right state could swing the whole thing.
[flagged]
>It's not for no reason that one state had more registered voters than the actual number of eligible voters in that state.
https://www.votebeat.org/michigan/2024/10/24/michigan-regist...
Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris
#179What's even the point of being a billionaire if you're still scared of Trump?
Why is everyone in this thread pushing the idea that Bezos is scared of Trump? It seems more plausible to me he is scared of the DoJ breaking up Amazon under Harris.
Has anyone brought that up? In the current administration? In the campaign?
Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris
#180It seems like it would be less polarizing if it was the default state for news and information outlets to not endorse any candidate ever and just remain as neutral as possible.
Why would they want to appear neutral? All news reporting, no matter what, is inherently biased in some way. There isn’t some “ideal” where that isn’t the case. There can’t be some magical font of unbiased information because just selecting what stories to put on the front page introduces bias.
News can’t be unbiased and being unbiased was never a goal. News is meant to inform, which includes facts as well as analysis. That seemingly the average American doesn’t understand that is a failure of the education system.