Live data from Hacker News

Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

cnbc.com

221–230 of 1001 posts

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#222

> CNBC has requested comment from Amazon. According to the article, Jeff Bezos is presumably afraid that Trump would continue to punish Amazon. If that is the case, this seems like an entirely futile exercise. Not that corporate PR responses are ever particularly illuminating. I read an article regarding information conveyed per syllable. English was near the top. Languages with less information per syllable like Spa…

Imagine taking as many steroids as Jeff Bezos has taken, only to end up being afraid of an obese elderly man who cheats at golf. What was the point of all that flexing?

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#224

[flagged]

To be clear, the camps never went away, and we’ve been mass deporting for decades now. Support of ICE is a bipartisan effort. Iirc the only change Biden made was to end the policy of family separations. The rhetoric is massively different, but the actual policy is not.

I really wouldn’t hold my breath for a president that doesn’t fearmonger about immigration in the forseeable future.

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#225
post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thats because of the calculation: - Endorse Harris and Trump wins, Trump will seek revenge on Bezos and Amazon (he tried this in the first term) - Endorse Trump and Harris wins, Harris will not act outside the bounds of a normal government official This is capitulation to the perceived threats of a Trump presidency and is very bad.

[flagged]

I mean he still appears to be making lots of money, and moreover being able to bend the rules without any serious consequences.

He has his own broadcast medium to play with and noone has banned it (apart from brazil, but all he had to do was pay some money)

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#226
post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Why do you think what Fox is doing is our standard? Why do we need Editorial Board’s biased opinion. Can we not have a truly unbiased journalism outlet?

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A journalist's job is to journal something, nothing more and nothing less. If a purported journalist wants to influence or otherwise lead his audience somewhere, he is many things (commentator, advocate, activist, influencer, etc.) but he is not a journalist.

Declaring your misunderstanding doesn't make it so. "Engineers make implements of war" or so.

An engineer is someone who develops and implements engines.

What is an engine? Citing Merriam Webster[1]:

>3a: something used to effect a purpose

So yes, an engineer can make implements of war among many other implements. The people who actually wage war are called other things.

[1]: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/engine

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#228
post #196

[flagged]

What an odd view of history to imagine that newspapers weren't always (and importantly) open about their editor's opinions.

The idea of "objective journalism" is both ahistorical and unsound and mostly just acts as cover for claiming that certain journalism has subjectivity we're not allowed to call out.

It's far better to know how the editors see the world than to falsely pretend that they don't.

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#230
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.

But it is not. They regularly make endorsements and call outs. They recently called for Biden to step down from the ticket, just months ago. It seems like we should not examine situations based on idealistic, non-existent scenarios but the world we actually live in.
Post reply on HN