It is evident that billionaire Jeff Bezos instructed the editorial board not to publish their endorsement of Kamala Harris. The editorial had already been written, but Bezos intervened to stop it. The directive came from Will Lewis, who Bezos had brought in from Rupert Murdoch’s conservative publishing empire.
The reasons behind Bezos’s decision remain unknown as he has not made any statements. Lewis issued a statement trying to justify the owner’s censorship of the editorial board as an act of high principle. However, as editor Ruth Marcus pointed out, if this decision had been made a year ago, it might have seemed principled. But coming just days before the election, it appears to be a cowardly and unethical move.
Here is the response from 17 of The Washington Post’s opinion writers:
The Washington Post’s choice not to endorse a candidate in the presidential race is a grave error. It goes against the core editorial principles of the newspaper that we hold dear. This is a crucial moment for the institution to reaffirm its dedication to democratic values, the rule of law, international alliances, and the threat that Donald Trump poses to them – the very points The Post emphasized in endorsing Trump’s opponents in 2016 and 2020. Making political endorsements is not incompatible with the crucial role of an independent newspaper, providing guidance to readers and expressing fundamental beliefs. This is especially true in the current election. While it may be reasonable for an independent newspaper to reconsider making presidential endorsements in the future, now is not the time, especially when one candidate’s positions directly jeopardize press freedom and constitutional values.
Karen Attiah
Perry Bacon Jr.
Matt Bai
Max Boot
Kate Cohen
E.J. Dionne Jr.
Lee Hockstader
David Ignatius
Heather Long
Ruth Marcus
Dana Milbank
Alexandra Petri
Catherine Rampell
Eugene Robinson
Jennifer Rubin
Karen Tumulty
Erik Wemple