“
Amazon founder Jeff Bezos may not permit The Washington Post to publish its traditional endorsement of a presidential candidate, but he is willing to write and publish an op-ed explaining his decision. He claims that this is all in an effort to maintain unbiased journalism.
Last Friday, The Post announced that it would not be endorsing a candidate in the upcoming election, which is considered to be one of the closest in modern American history. Reports suggest that two Post writers had written an article endorsing Kamala Harris, but Bezos, the billionaire owner of the outlet, decided to kill the story.
In the face of criticism, Bezos is standing by his choice. His op-ed suggests that this decision will be a change in policy for future elections. He stated, “ending [endorsements] is a principled decision, and it’s the right one.” Bezos believes that this move is a step towards regaining the trust of readers who have become disillusioned with the media industry in general.
Referring to Gallup’s data on declining trust in institutions, including the media, Bezos wrote, “our profession is now the least trusted of all. Something we are doing is clearly not working.” Despite owning The Post since 2013, Bezos made his fortune in the tech industry, where he founded Amazon. Amazon did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
“It would be easy to blame others for our long and continuing fall in credibility (and, therefore, decline in impact), but a victim mentality will not help,” Bezos wrote. “Complaining is not a strategy.” He also stated that “presidential endorsements do nothing to tip the scales of an election,” and that they only “create a perception of bias.”
Research from professors at Brown University indicates that endorsements can actually be influential, as voters are more likely to support the recommended candidate after the endorsement is published. However, the level of influence varies based on one’s bias.
Bezos acknowledges that the timing of the decision is not ideal, as the election is just two weeks away from the announcement. He called it “inadequate planning, and not some intentional strategy,” and he emphasized that there is “no quid pro quo of any kind at work here.” Despite this, Dave Limp, the CEO of Bezos’ Blue Origin, met with Republican candidate Donald Trump on the day of the announcement.
Bezos claimed he was unaware of the meeting beforehand and urged people to trust him. He defended his track record at The Post, stating that his views are “principled.”
Bezos admits that being a billionaire may not be the best fit for his role (though he shows no intention of resigning). He wrote, “When it comes to the appearance of conflict, I am not an ideal owner of The Post,” noting that officials from Amazon, Blue Origin, or other companies he has invested in often meet with politicians. “I once wrote that The Post is a ‘complexifier’ for me. It is, but it turns out I’m also a complexifier for The Post.”
The newspaper, known for its slogan “democracy dies in darkness,” has endorsed a candidate in every election since 1976. The only exception was in 1988, according to NPR. The decision to refrain from endorsing a candidate has been met with swift backlash from both internal and external sources.
Editor-at-large Robert Kagan resigned on the same day as the announcement, stating that the change in endorsement policy was “obviously an effort by Jeff Bezos to curry favor with Donald Trump in anticipation of his possible victory,” as “Trump has threatened to go after Bezos’ business.” Three out of ten members of The Post’s editorial board also stepped down due to the decision, and other journalists and columnists followed suit.
An op-ed signed by 21 Post columnists criticized the decision as a “terrible mistake” and claimed it “represents an abandonment of the fundamental editorial convictions of the newspaper that we love.”
Bezos’ decision has also had an impact on readership: Over 200,000 people, representing approximately 8% of the outlet’s total subscriber base, canceled their subscriptions to The Post as of Monday, according to sources cited by NPR.
“It’s a colossal number,” former Post executive editor Marcus Brauchli told NPR, noting that there is no way to know “why the decision was made.”
One likely factor contributing to America’s distrust of the media is the growing skepticism towards the wealthy. With wealth inequality on the rise, a Harris Poll survey of over 2,100 U.S. adults revealed that more than half (59%) of Americans believe billionaires contribute to a more unfair society.
While respondents recognize the influence of billionaires on the economy, many feel that they should not have a presence in certain areas, including the media. 42% of Americans surveyed do not believe billionaires should be allowed to purchase businesses in the media sector.
As one of the wealthiest individuals globally, Bezos’ wealth is a significant point of contention. “You can see my wealth and business interests as a bulwark against intimidation, or you can see them as a web of conflicting interests,” he wrote in his op-ed. It appears that many Americans view it as the latter.
“