Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 1001 posts

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#211

Post by transcriptase »

coldpie wrote: post #16
Molitor5901 wrote: post #11

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?

I actually agree with you, newspapers really shouldn't be doing this. Our major local paper in the Twin Cities basically torched its reputation by endorsing wildly unqualified candidates for city offices (like, one guy they endorsed for Minneapolis city council didn't even live in Minneapolis). They recently decided to stop doing endorsements at all, which I think is the right decision. But that's not what happened h…

[flagged]

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#212

Post by roenxi »

oivey wrote: post #180
ahnick wrote: post #76

It 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 analysi…

[flagged]

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#213

Post by user3939382 »

oivey wrote: post #180
ahnick wrote: post #76

It 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 analysi…

You’re suggesting there’s no difference between journalism that attempts objectivity and outright political advocacy which is clearly false. Perfect neutrality doesn’t exist, we can even get into a discussion of what knowledge is, that doesn’t mean news outlets don’t have an obligation to try. They did in decades past which is evident from a review of older journalism.

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#214

Post by frugalmail »

rKarpinski wrote: post #184
staplers wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

they go after him Would love to hear what horrible consequences you think Elon is facing..

They retroactively invalidated several years of compensation packages...

[flagged]

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#215

Post by danans »

taylodl wrote: post #22
coding123 wrote: post #6

There is definitely a quiet support among the faang owners for Trump.

I think you can remove one of those A's from FAANG supporting Trump, and it's not Bezos' A...

Maybe not "supporting", but the other A apparently isn't above currying favor with him:

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-says-apple-ceo-cook-c...

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#216

Post by ajross »

bojan wrote: post #99
w0m wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

clear favorite or coin toss.

Clear favourite. It might be a toin coss still at this moment, but the odds are getting ever-so-slightly worse for Kamala for many days in a row now. So it's about the trend. On top of that, the growth of the blue firewall in PA is losing steam too early...

Seems like in the language I speak "ever so slightly" and "clear" are in opposition. You can be a clear favorite or a slight favorite. Which is it?

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#217

Post by pstuart »

smeeger wrote: post #191
wumeow wrote: post #31

"Democracy dies in darkness" and silence, apparently.

[flagged]

Being that he's stated his desire to be a dictator and has an army of enablers to help him, it's not an unreasonable fear.

Obviously this topic is a third rail here, but I think it's important to say that he upended the political environment and we are in uncharted waters now.

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#218

Post by goostavos »

newswasboring wrote: post #169
goostavos wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because it has always been done doesn't make it good . It's surprising to me that a news organization not publishing an opinion piece is itself giant front page news

What's so bad about large institutions in the opinion shaping space endorsing?

Nothing, I suppose. I honestly didn't realize it's so contentious. I guess it just seemed kind of weird for "the news" to have an opinion at all. Why do people want an organization to tell them who they think should be president?

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#219

Post by CamperBob2 »

ahnick wrote: post #76

It 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.

Being neutral in the face of a candidate who has promised to do what Trump has promised to do may not be the virtue you think it is.

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#220

Post by bitwize »

BaculumMeumEst wrote: post #174
bitwize wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

What it is is highly marketable. There's no denying she has talent -- as a savvy businesswoman -- to crack the code of what her audience wants to hear so well she can churn out music that people will pay top dollar to see performed live.
Post reply on HN