Tensions erupted within The Washington Post this week after owner Jeff Bezos reportedly blocked the paper’s editorial board from endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris for the 2024 presidential election.
In an audio recording obtained by the Washington Free Beacon, opinion editor David Shipley can be heard attempting to manage the fallout as frustrated editors and columnists reacted to the decision. Shipley explained that he had tried unsuccessfully to sway Bezos in a one-on-one call, calling the decision “a bomb” that had now left the team “picking up the pieces.”
The decision to avoid endorsements is a significant break from tradition at the Post, which has a largely left-leaning readership and has positioned itself as a guardian of democracy since the 2016 election, adopting the slogan “Democracy Dies in Darkness.” Yet, following a declaration from publisher William Lewis on Friday, the paper is now taking a stance of editorial neutrality in the 2024 presidential race.
Lewis, a British executive, stated that as the “newspaper of the capital city of the most important country in the world,” the Post should strive for independence rather than partisan alignment.
Critics within the organization, however, voiced concerns that Bezos’s decision compromised the Post’s independence. Opinion writer Jen Rubin raised concerns about a potential conflict of interest, pointing out that Bezos’s business empire, particularly Amazon, has numerous dealings with the federal government.
Rubin noted that if Trump wins, readers could reasonably question Bezos’s influence on the Post’s editorial stance, highlighting the complexity that arises when business interests intersect with journalism.
Columnist Ruth Marcus and others echoed this sentiment, arguing that the absence of an endorsement essentially silenced the Post’s voice in a pivotal election. Some, like Dana Milbank and Eugene Robinson, feared that long-term credibility and readership loyalty could be at risk.
Columnist Catherine Rampell lamented that she could no longer assure readers that the paper’s owner remained hands-off with editorial decisions, while others speculated that not endorsing Harris could ultimately assist Trump’s campaign.
To compound matters, the Post disclosed that at least 250,000 digital subscriptions—nearly 10%—were canceled following the endorsement ban, underscoring readers’ dissatisfaction. The cancellations come as the Post faces financial strain, with losses totaling $75 million last year and a recent 50% decline in internet traffic from 2020.
In response, some staff members proposed ways to sidestep the no-endorsement rule by indirectly publishing support for Harris without labeling it as an endorsement.