Amazon Founder Jeff Bezos may not approve The Washington Post to run a traditional endorsement for a presidential candidate, but he’s willing to write and direct one opinion ed justifying his move. It’s all in the name of keeping the media unbiased, Jeff Bezos insists.
the last fridayhas Publication He announced that he would not support any candidate in the upcoming elections, according to some. one of the closest in modern American history. Sources said two Publication The writers produced an article endorsing Kamala Harris, but the story was killed by Bezos, the store’s billionaire owner.
In the face of backlash, Bezos stands by his words. But Bezos’ comments indicate that this is a policy shift for future elections. Regarding the issue of admissions, “ending them is a principled decision, and it is appropriate”. He called his decision a “significant step in the right direction” in regaining the trust of readers, amid general disillusionment with the sector.
Referring to Gallup’s Regarding the data on serious faith in institutions, including the media, Bezos wrote that “our profession is the most trusted of all today. Something we’re doing is clearly not working.” Despite owning Publication Since 2013, Bezos made his fortune and spent most of his career in the technology sector where he founded Amazon. Amazon did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
“It would be easy to blame others for our long and steady decline in credibility (and therefore influence), but a victim mentality won’t help,” Bezos wrote. “Complaining is not a strategy.” Stating that “presidential endorsements do nothing to tip the balance of the election,” Bezos said all they do is “create the perception of bias.”
Brown University faculty research the shows said endorsements are indeed influential “in the sense that voters are more likely to endorse the recommended candidate after the endorsement is published.” But the effect varies depending on one’s bias.
Even Bezos admits the timing is a little off, with the election only two weeks away from the announcement of the decision. Calling the move “inadequate planning, and not a deliberate strategy”, he emphasized that “there is no kid pro quo at work here”. That’s all despite Bezos’ Blue Origin CEO Dave Limp meeting with Republican nominee Donald Trump on the day of the announcement.
Bezos said he did not know about the meeting in advance, and asked people to have confidence. Calling his career PublicationBezos said his views are “principled”.
Maybe this isn’t a billionaire’s job, Bezos admits (though reluctant to resign). “When it comes to the appearance of conflict, I’m not an ideal owner of The Post,” he wrote, adding that officials from Amazon, Blue Origin or other companies he has invested in often meet with politicians. “I once wrote that The Post is ‘complexing’ for me. It is, but I am also a complicator of The Post.’
The newspaper, whose slogan is “Democracy lies in darkness,” has endorsed a candidate since 1976—the only other time. Publication he refused in 1988, according to NPR. The choice to stay on the sidelines had some swift reactions from both insiders and outsiders.
Editor-in-Chief Robert Kagan he resigned counting on the same day of the announcement about the change of guarantees CNN The policy “is known to have been an effort by Jeff Bezos to favor Donald Trump in anticipation of his potential victory,” because “Trump has threatened to go after Bezos’ business.” Three out of ten people Posts editorial board He also left his position because of the decision, while others the journalists and the columnists also exit in response.
A comment signed by 21 Publication the columnists He dismisses this choice as a “terrible mistake”, adding that it “represents an abandonment of the core editorial convictions of our beloved newspaper”.
Bezos’ choice also led to a decline in readership: As of Monday, more than 200,000 people — about 8 percent of the outlet’s total subscribers — had canceled their subscriptions to the Post, sources said. NPR.
“It’s a colossal number,” said Marcus Brauchlik, the Post’s former executive director NPR He added that according to the drop in subscribers, “why the decision was taken” is not known:
A crucial element in America’s mistrust of the media is theirs growing skepticism the richest As wealth inequality widens, more than half of Americans (59%) believe that billionaires create a more unfair society for each. in the Harris Poll It released a survey of more than 2,100 US adults.
Although the respondents have some recognition of the influence of millionaires on the economy, many want them outside of certain spheres. One of them is the media, as 42% of Americans do not believe that billionaires should be able to buy businesses in the media sector.
As one of the richest people in the world, Bezos’ wealth isn’t just the elephant in the room; it’s basically the whole room. “You can view my wealth and business interests as a hedge against fear, or you can view them as a web of conflicting interests,” he wrote in his op-ed. Some Americans seem to see the latter.
