Jeff Bezos, the founder of Amazon, has decided that The Washington Post will not issue its traditional endorsement of a presidential candidate, choosing instead to author an op-ed explaining this decision. He claims this action is in pursuit of maintaining media neutrality.
On a recent Friday, The Washington Post announced it would refrain from endorsing any candidate in the upcoming presidential election, which many anticipate to be one of the closest in America’s recent history. Sources indicated that two writers from the Post had drafted an article supporting Kamala Harris, but it was halted by Bezos, the paper’s billionaire owner.
Despite criticism, Bezos stands firm on his decision, which he signals as a shift in policy for forthcoming elections. In his op-ed, he describes ending endorsements as a “principled decision” and “the right one.” He views this move as a step toward rebuilding reader trust amid widespread disillusionment with the media industry.
Referencing Gallup data showing declining trust in institutions, including the media, Bezos stated, “our profession is now the least trusted of all.” Bezos, who has owned the Post since 2013, spent most of his career in the tech industry, notably founding Amazon. Amazon did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
In his op-ed, Bezos remarked that blaming others for the media’s declining credibility is unproductive, arguing that “presidential endorsements do nothing to tip the scales of an election” and merely “create a perception of bias.” Research from Brown University professors suggests that while endorsements can influence voter decisions, the extent of their impact varies depending on individual biases.
Bezos acknowledged the timing of this decision, just two weeks before the election, as a result of “inadequate planning, not some intentional strategy,” stressing there was “no quid pro quo” involved, despite a meeting on the same day between Dave Limp, a Blue Origin executive, and Republican candidate Donald Trump.
He asserted he was unaware of the meeting, urging the public to trust his “principled” views, referring to his tenure at the Post. However, Bezos conceded his position might not be ideal due to potential conflicts of interest stemming from meetings between officials of his ventures, like Blue Origin and Amazon, with politicians.
The Washington Post, with the motto “democracy dies in darkness,” has previously abstained from endorsing candidates only once since 1976. The decision has sparked backlash from both internal and external sources.
Robert Kagan, editor-at-large, resigned in response, alleging the move aimed to appease Trump amid potential business threats, as told to CNN. Additionally, three out of ten editorial board members from the Post resigned, as did numerous journalists and columnists.
An op-ed signed by 21 Post columnists criticized the decision as a “terrible mistake,” suggesting it represented a deviation from the newspaper’s core editorial principles.
The choice has also caused a reduction in readership, with over 200,000 subscribers, approximately 8% of the total, canceling their subscriptions, according to NPR. Former Post executive editor Marcus Brauchli described this as a “colossal number,” acknowledging the difficulty in understanding the motive behind the decision.
One factor contributing to growing distrust in media may be skepticism towards the wealthy, as illustrated by a Harris Poll indicating 59% of Americans believe billionaires exacerbate societal inequality. Further, 42% of survey respondents feel billionaires should not own media outlets.
As one of the world’s wealthiest individuals, Bezos’s wealth and business interests play a significant role in public perception. In his op-ed, he acknowledged that his financial empire might be perceived as either protection against intimidation or as a complex web of conflicting interests. For many Americans, it appears to be viewed as the latter.