Bezos gets backlash: ‘Non-endorsement’ has WaPo subscribers cancel, editor resign

In a break with decades of tradition, the Washington Post on Friday, 25 October, surprised America — and reportedly its own staff — with the announcement that it would not endorse any presidential candidate this time.

The decision — a first in the paper's career since 1976 — came from Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, who now also owns the Washington Post. The announcement was made public in an article that also noted that two editorial-page staffers had already worked on a draft endorsing Kamala Harris of the Democrats over the Republican candidate, Donald Trump.

Many read it as Bezos, a multi-company billionaire, hedging his bets in anticipation of a Trump victory. Editor-in-chief of Mother Jones (a non-profit progressive magazine) Clara Jeffery posted that 'Billionaires have more affinity to each other'.

Trump had had some choice words for Bezos and the Post in 2013, and the newspaper had in 2016 and in 2020 endorsed his opponents Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden, respectively, in editorials that had seemed to respond in kind to the former Republican president.

However, others highlighted the news of Trump's meeting with Blue Origin executives in Austin while campaigning soon after this announcement was published.

The Blue Origin space exploration company is also owned by Bezos — and holds, among other things, a $3.4 billion NASA contract.

Other media houses have joined the contentious debate, with the Atlantic boldly advising readers to cancel Amazon Prime rather than the Post — in other words, to hit Bezos where it hurts most.

But already some 2,000 subscribers had rage-quit on Friday itself, media outlet Semafor reported.

And while chief executive and publisher William Lewis claimed it was a "return to our roots", editor-at-large Robert Kagan — a prominent journalist in his own right — stepped down and out. Lewis was clearly right at least where he acknowledged many readers would read the Post's decision as "an abdication of responsibility".

Renowned author Stephen King was one of those subscribers who clearly agreed with that part of Lewis' statement, cancelling his subscription after a (short) five years.

King also amplified another reader's tweet that referenced the Post's motto of 'Democracy dies in darkness' and said: 'Guess they'd know about darkness, what with having their head up their own ass about this.'

The NPR, another renowned outlet, claimed insider knowledge that the editorial staff were "uniformly negative" and blindsided by the announcement, which was internally shared by David Shipley, the editorial page editor who claimed to have known of it for a time. It remains unclear why the staff drafting the endorsement, then, were kept in the dark.

A former executive editor of the Post, Martin Baron, in an interview with NPR spoke of the decision betraying a “disturbing spinelessness at an institution famed for courage”.

Baron was interviewed by CNN as well on Saturday, 26 October, and dismissed Lewis' statement as laughable, saying, “To declare a moment of high principle, only 11 days before the election that is just highly suspect that is just not to be believed that this was a matter of principle at this point.”

Baron also claimed that Trump had threatened Bezos “continually” while he was at the paper, and added “Bezos has other commercial interests, a big stake in Amazon; he has a space company called Blue Origin... Trump has threatened to pursue his political enemies and he rewards his friends and he punishes his perceived political and think there’s no other explanation for what’s happening right now.”

CNN also talked to Kagan after he quit, and he seemed to echo Baron too: “This is obviously an effort by Jeff Bezos to curry favor with Donald Trump in the anticipation of his possible victory,” Kagan told CNN on Friday after he stepped down. “Trump has threatened to go after Bezos’ business. Bezos runs one of the largest companies in America. They have tremendously intricate relations with federal government. They depend on the federal government.”

It would seem governmental and corporate pressure on the media is not exclusive to the 'mother of democracy' after all.