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

281–290 of 1001 posts

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#281

Post by georgeecollins »

dotnet00 wrote: post #257

I like this trend of taking neutral positions that seems to be picking up again, although the timing for this doesn't look good. Just as how universities are starting to adopt neutrality, so should news outlets.

Endorsements come opinions editors, a special part of the paper where the paper prints opinions, not news.

I agree that it would be nice if news outlets tried to always be neutral, but a lot of TV news channels in the US would have almost nothing to say if you stopped their opinion reporting.

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#282

Post by [deleted] »

moduspol wrote: post #52

More 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.

[deleted]

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#283

Post by blackeyeblitzar »

ignoramous wrote: post #201
Dalewyn wrote: post #190

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.

> If a purported journalist wants to influence ... he is not a journalist https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advocacy_journalism

That seems to just describe activism, not journalism. What makes it journalism to you - the association with a company that punishes a newspaper?

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#284

Post by dralley »

sleepybrett wrote: post #250
janalsncm wrote: post #144

> 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…

No, he's fucking terrified of lina khan. He won't endorse trump and poke the bear and he won't endorse harris because he's embittered. He's a cowardly monopolist.

1) He already has experience with the Trump admin trying to deny AWS from government contracts on the basis of Trump's personal frustration with the Washington Post.

2) It's notable that his other significant enterprise is Blue Origin, whose competitor is Elon Musk, who has by now deeply and publicly ingratiated himself with the Trump campaign.

Maybe Lina Khan is part of the story, but it's silly to act like there aren't more straightforwards reasons.

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#285

Post by deepsquirrelnet »

moduspol wrote: post #52

More 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.

Probably the opposite. He doesn’t think it’s significant, but the risk of petty retaliation IS significant.

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#286

Post by oivey »

roenxi wrote: post #212
oivey wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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]

That’s fair enough, but you should consider that a news source might be biased toward facts and empathy and still might endorse a candidate.

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#287

Post by adamc »

dang wrote: post #246
morkalork wrote: post #164

[flagged]

Your comment broke several of the site guidelines, by (1) posting in the flamewar style, including nationalistic flamebait, (2) being snarky, (3) doing political battle, and (4) commenting about getting downvoted. Would you mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and sticking to the rules? We'd appreciate it because we're trying to avoid hell here.

This is a story that is going to lead to political passions. Don't want such stories? Just kill them. What kind of useful conversation do you think it will raise that will not ignite passions?

Sometimes your guidelines are stupid.

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#288

Post by johnnyanmac »

Dalewyn wrote: post #190
maxerickson wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not automatically unethical for a journalist to advocate for something. I guess if they entirely stopped publishing self authored editorials it might be "neutral" to not publish a particular one. But that isn't what is happening.

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.

Devil's advocate: you can be more than one thing at once. And newspapers never promised to only be for journalism.

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#289

Post by bigstrat2003 »

dclowd9901 wrote: post #109
bamboozled wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If this race is right, then whatever I thought about people was wrong. Then again, I always wonder what the hell actually went through peoples minds in Nazi Germany.

Looks like you’re getting a firsthand view now.

[flagged]

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#290

Post by EasyMark »

SavageBeast wrote: post #170
neves wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is the the billionaire owner of the newspaper is censoring it, not the number of votes that will change.

Is it censorship when your boss forbids you publishing your personal opinion as the official position of his company? It's funny reading the comments here but has anyone considered that Bezos may in fact support Trump? Bezos is a billionaire and Harris seeks to target them to fix the deficit. Its just possible Bezos supports Trump and it makes economic sense too, though its terribly unfashionable to come out and say…

A newspaper isn't a "regular" business. There's a reason why the press has explicit protection in the Constitution. It is a special entity, and now Bezos has killed a 40 year tradition because he's afraid Trump will come after him if he wins. So this is likely a Hail Mary to try and save himself from potential imprisonment and fines from a Trump administration. I would have preferred they just come and support Trump if that's what Bezos wanted instead of waffling.
Post reply on HN