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

581–590 of 1001 posts

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#581

Post by lysace »

hluska wrote: post #576
lysace wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The Globe and Mail is a Canadian paper. Here is its history of endorsements since 1984: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/federal-electi... There is an entire Wikipedia page devoted only to endorsements in the 2024 United Kingdom general election: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endorsements_in_the_2024_Uni...

Yeah, it does seem big in anglo-saxon countries. (I already posted that Wikipedia page, btw.)

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#582

Post by kasey_junk »

rufus_foreman wrote: post #548
devindotcom wrote: post #534

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You want them to name... readers of newspapers? Editorials, by an outlet's editorial board or otherwise, have consistently been among the most popular content in news for over a century. That includes endorsements.

>> You want them to name... readers of newspapers? Obviously not. I want them to name readers who seek out newspaper opinions. One name to start with. Do you seek out newspaper opinions?

Yes. I read the opinion sections on all 4 of the major newspapers I subscribe to. Why wouldn’t I?

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#583

Post by edmundsauto »

jimbiliy325 wrote: post #423
edmundsauto wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One candidate has proposed a day of violence and given indications they consider “anyone who disagrees with me” as an “enemy within”. I don’t think they have talked about televised tribunals, and they also have a … tenuous … relationship with the truth or following through on promises (even when baselines against normal “politician lie rate”)

yeah, and kamala just flat out isn't taking any non-scripted interviews - how are we supposed to know what she's really thinking at all?

Do you not think that people communicate their intention in a scripted situation?

I, personally, script meetings because I don’t communicate effectively when put on the spot. To me, “unscripted” interviews feel like gotcha journalism - why not let someone take their time to describe their thought process?

POTUS is not in a tactical fighter jet dogfight where low latency is massively important. What matters is thinking things through, to consider second order effects.

Instinctual reactions are great for sports but I have no idea why they’d be important for politics, outside of optics. Type II systems, not type I.

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#584

Post by topspin »

adamc wrote: post #166

Good reason not to subscribe to the WP.

There you are! The correct response.

Should this not fall under the "private company, do what they want" mantra we were all so fond of wrt (pre-Musk...) Twitter, Facebook, et al? The further advice then was; "make your own social media platform."

Same thing happened at LA times a few days ago, also replete with an editor quitting, when owner Patrick Soon-Shiong blocked the same Kamala endorsement.

You're free to not subscribe, some editor or other is free to quit, and owners are free to do as they please with their private property. Freedom. What a great idea.

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#585

Post by soupbowl »

nomdep wrote: post #480
SkipperCat wrote: post #373

Democracy dies in darkness was a promise, not a warning.

I'm sick of this absurd FUD. You surely must realize that the claims that if Trump wins, democracy is going to end are just fearmongering, don't you?

How is it FUD? The last time Trump was elected Democracy died... didn't it? /s

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#586

Post by noirbot »

roenxi wrote: post #572
thimabi wrote: post #556

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Couldn't a simple answer here be that he felt Kamala is unqualified and terrible and as a newspaper with a lot of readership and influence, he decided against endorsing her? Sure, but why should the personal opinion of the owner of the newspaper prevail over the opinion of the editorial staff?

Because they own the newspaper. The question answers itself. There isn't any reason some random employee should have their opinion privileged over the owner. Or vice versa, to be fair, but the joy of being an owner is being able to pull rank. If an owner can't get decisions made in a way that is favourable to them then there are very real questions about whether they are, in fact, owning the company.

Sure, and we get to look at the fact that he silently pulled rank to kill a story for craven reasons and decide worse of him and decide that his control of the news we get from that paper makes it suspect to his whims. If he's willing to kill something this major, he's willing to kill smaller stories about Amazon, or himself, or anything else him or his friends care about.

It completely flies in the face of the values of the paper and the reasons Bezos said he was buying it. If I wanted to get Bezos's press releases, I could get them on Amazon or Blue Origin's press site. No one's claiming he's not literally allowed to do this, but that it's spoiling the product. If Bezos bought McDonalds and made it serve only vegan burgers without explanation that's totally his right as the owner, but it's insane and makes you question why they did it.

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#587

Post by mjcl »

kcplate wrote: post #261
bogantech wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But that's not what happened here. The editors did their normal endorsement process, but the owner of the paper stepped in and personally overrode their process for this one particular endorsement. He owns the paper, they just work there.

Honestly it’s surprising to me that people really think that the news side of a media company operates with complete autonomy from the business side. They might claim it exists but that’s a fallacy. I worked at a major daily newspaper 30 years ago and I personally know of two cases in my short tenure there where news stories were killed because they didn’t want to piss off important advertisers. I am also aware of a…

Then I'd suggest their tagline of "Democracy dies in darkness" is pretty self-important and misleading.

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#588

Post by [deleted] »

thimabi wrote: post #556
carbatterylife wrote: post #331

[flagged]

> Couldn't a simple answer here be that he felt Kamala is unqualified and terrible and as a newspaper with a lot of readership and influence, he decided against endorsing her? Sure, but why should the personal opinion of the owner of the newspaper prevail over the opinion of the editorial staff?

[deleted]

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#589

Post by tbrownaw »

daft_pink wrote: post #34

Is anyone really changing their mind based on some newspaper endorsement? I’m pretty sure everyone knows who they’re gonna vote for at this point.

> I’m pretty sure everyone knows who they’re gonna vote for at this point.

I already did (yay early voting), but I was pretty close to just flipping a coin. Not for red vs blue, but for the lesser evil vs one of the more amusing third parties.

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#590

Post by laidoffamazon »

carbatterylife wrote: post #331

[flagged]

It's not his endorsement, it's an endorsement written by the editorial board that he told them not to run. Notably, he didn't endorse either.

He's entitled to do so as owner of the paper. But it reeks of cowardice.

Post reply on HN