As someone who used to write regularly for the newspaper, it has been a long time since I have had an occasion to say this but . . . Bravo, Washington Post.
This week, the Post announced that not only would it not endorse a candidate this year, but it would not do so in the future. Over two decades ago, I wrote a column calling for newspapers to end the practice of all election endorsements. (Yes, before all things seemed to turn on how you feel about Donald Trump). I have continued to push the press to abandon this pernicious practice.
When I first came out against political endorsements, the media had not taken the plunge into advocacy journalism, which is now strangling the life out of this industry.
As former New York Times writer (and now Howard University journalism professor) Nikole Hannah-Jones has declared that “all journalism is activism.”
After a series of interviews with over 75 media leaders, Leonard Downie Jr., former Washington Post executive editor, and Andrew Heyward, former CBS News president, reaffirmed this shift. As Emilio Garcia-Ruiz, editor-in-chief at the San Francisco Chronicle, stated: “Objectivity has got to go.”
The result has been the plummeting of trust in the media to an all-time low. Revenues and readership are falling as outlets struggle to survive. Yet, reporters are still refusing to reconsider the abandonment of neutrality and objectivity.
Recently, Post owner Jeff Bezos brought in Washington Post publisher and CEO William Lewis, who promptly delivered a truth bomb in the middle of the newsroom by telling the staff, “Let’s not sugarcoat it…We are losing large amounts of money. Your audience has halved in recent years. People are not reading your stuff. Right? I can’t sugarcoat it anymore.”
The response was calls for Lewis and other editors to be canned. These reporters would rather give up their very jobs than their bias.
Now Lewis is under fire again after announcing, “We are returning to our roots of not endorsing presidential candidates.”
The Washington Post Guild immediately went ballistic at the thought of not openly supporting Kamala Harris, though many would point out that the Post has hardly been subtle in its coverage on that point.
The Guild expressed alarm at the thought of leaving readers to reach their own conclusions “a mere 11 days ahead of an immensely consequential election.” According to the staff, the Post needs “to help guide readers,” and “according to our own reporters and Guild members, an endorsement for Harris was already drafted, and the decision not to publish was made by The Post’s owner, Jeff Bezos.”
Perish the thought that the Post would start to raise free-range readers left to reach their own conclusions.
Former executive editor Martin “Marty” Baron and others went into absolute vapors. Baron declared, “This is cowardice, with democracy as its casualty.”
Others retreated into anonymity to denounce their management, with some making precisely the case for not doing such endorsement: “It very disingenuously draws false equivalencies. This is not, for example, Kamala Harris vs. Mitt Romney. This is Kamala Harris against someone who tried to disenfranchise the electorate last time.”
It is ironic since, at the time, Romney was portrayed as a fascist, as were prior Republican nominees.
One of the most curious responses came from Sen. Bernie Sanders (I, Vt.): “This is what Oligarchy is about. Jeff Bezos, the 2nd wealthiest person in the world and the owner of the Washington Post, overrides his editorial board and refuses to endorse Kamala.”
An oligarchy is defined as “government by the few.” That is precisely what the public sees in an effective state media and why “Let’s Go Brandon!” became a type of “Yankee Doodling” of the political and media establishment.
Sanders’s objection is that the owner decided not to exercise the power of the few but instead left the choice to voters. According to Sanders, that is the definition of oligarchy in declining to act as an oligarch.
As discussed years ago, the decision of newspapers to engage in political endorsements has had a corrosive influence for years. It destroys the separation between newspapers and those who are supposed to be the subjects of their investigatory and journalistic work.
My prior column called for the termination of not just presidential endorsements, though it is a good start. There should be a commitment to total neutrality in all elections, from judges to senators to presidents.
The Washington Post is not alone. The Los Angeles Times has declined to make an endorsement, which also led to a staff revolt.
The decision not to endorse in this election could prove a critical moment for mainstream media in turning the corner on the era of advocacy journalism. While skeptical, I genuinely hope that Bezos has decided to reconsider the course of the Post. We need the Post and the rest of the mainstream media. The media plays a critical role in our democracy as a neutral source of information on government abuse and corruption.
However, that role also needs the trust of the public. Otherwise, as Lewis told the Post staff, “no one is reading your stuff.”
That is evident from the very closeness of this election. After years of unrelenting anti-Trump coverage and a billion-dollar war chest to sell Harris to the public, the country is still divided right down the middle.
The Post and other papers are writing for each other and core Democratic readers. The rest of America is moving on to new media on social media and other sources.
For those of us who loved the old Post and want our “Fourth Estate” to be strong, this is a meaningful start.
So Bravo, Washington Post.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
This column ran in Fox.com.
Core issue which is unlikely to change is that since inception journalists have truly believed they are smarter than everyone else. Perpetual college sophmores who know everything. Global phenomenon.
It’s simple-minded for activist journalists to think their endorsement helps the named candidate. What if the disgust factor (arrogant journalists trying to amplify their impact on the election) nudges voters to thwart their motives, and vote for the opposite candidate?
Sometimes things work the opposite from what the zealot expects, common sense having left the building.
It’s about time. Being fed warm milk by the press and the Press Guild as to whom to vote for is nothing more than some staff and editorial board spoon feeding its readers. I read the NYT in the late 60’s that it was their mission to tell Americans who to vote for. That was the last time I paid for a NYT anything. Who do they think they are? If the current education system was not in such a mess, created by a few, real education could actually be constructive in people’s choices. Remember it’s WE THE PEOPLE, not We Will Tell you The People.
It is certainly true that activist journals are the historical standard. But at this stage, I don’t believe that is an option for WAPO/NYT because their previous prestige, fame and fortune derived from their false reputations as the gold standard of journalistic impartiality, and they will thus be open to lawsuits requesting disgorgement of ill-gotten gains.
Hence, adopting a strict nonpartisan posture is their only legal choice. WAPO/NYT will either do their penance by stamping out their activism, or they will be the butt of untold lawsuits seeking disgorgement for their knowingly fraudulent abuse of the reading public, not to mention harm to the integrity of the United States.
If Jack Smith can win the silliest of indictments on so illegitimate a legal theory that a President of the United States had defrauded the Nation in which he held the highest executive authority, allegedly on the basis of speaking out about election fraud, and thus contradicting his advisors, well, criminal indictments for defrauding the Nation and harming the integrity of United States would not be out of the question for WAPO/NYT.
It seems we should pause to hold my utterly bereft intellect up for inspection every so often. It’s a painful condition.
Advocacy journalism? How is this any different than old fashion “objective journalism” where the news basically served the interests of the journal’s corporate owners? The only difference is these “new journalists” obscure class relations with woke, culture war nonsense. I read the Boston Globe…well, I read the sports page…but, the front page “news” pieces are simply a few hand picked facts mixed with opinions of the editorialists. Why should I care what the professional managerial classes think. They’re still the same olde functionaries of the oligarchs who appear to be grasping at straws these days to retain any sort of credibility and sales figures. So they lapse into ever more feverish virtue signaling. In the absence of Hunter Thompson’s vitriolic analytical skills I’ll stick with the sports page.
Regarding candidate Harris:
“She is such a popular Vice President that over 12 million people have hiked thousands of miles from South America to come meet her.”
-from Babylon Bee
I told the Sacramento Bee I would not subscribe to their paper until they produced a politics free edition. I am not going to pay to get lied to. They are shrinking like an ice cube on the hot cement of a Sacramento summer.
Bingo. You nailed it. Thx.
Journalists have a role to play in the election campaign, pulling teeth from the candidates to get clarity about their policy positions and problem-solving aptitudes. When they endorse a candidate, they are trying to amplify their impact beyond the 1 vote they are entitled to cast in private — that’s going out of their lane.
The trolls from the party of self-loathing, identity politics, and neo-Marxist idiocy have struck again. And theirs is a campaign of “joy” like that unhinged Kamala supporter screaming obscenities into a two year old girl’s face.
^^^Fake oldmanfromkansas^^^^
I did not post the above.
OldManFromKS,
Running on the “joy” thing was yet another one of the Harris campaign failures. Right up there with campaigning on the Beyonce “concert” taking those people’s money for a three minute speech by Beyonce who then walked off the stage. But, hey! The Harris campaign got their money!
Is ‘the “joy” thing’ the new ‘Big Lie’?
How marvelous!
While this policy change is a needed step in the right direction, can WaPo really say it does not endorse a candidate, when its news coverage basically serves as PR for the Democrat Party?
We need straight news. Editorials have their place, but editorials now masquerade as journalism.
Karen S,
That is why I am a paid subscriber to The Free Press. They are nearly three quarters of the way to a million subscribers. Pretty soon, they will have more paid subscribers than the WaPo or the NYT.
ATTENTION!!!
IMPOSTER ALERT !!!!
An imposter has been posting many comments under my name.
As you all know, I never post a comment of less than 25,000 words.
Any comment less than this is a fake post that did not come from me.
Thanks for the heads up John.
I will ignore all posts less than 25,000 words.
Likewise.
I will ignore all John Say posts less than 25,000 words.
A lot of posts tonight under your name are less than 25,000 words.
I will ignore them all.
Duly noted.
Short posts will be ignored
I’m just gonna sit here drinking and eating boogers.
John Say should just cowboy the f#$k up and admit his posts here are just an amateurs attempt at channeling the dead AF voice of Ayn Rand.
Dummy, your ignorance is clearly demonstrated in your comment. Though libertarianism (John) might be compatible with objectivism, the two differ considerably.
ROFL
Well Said!
Paradox alert !!!
Commenter uses post less than 25K words to claim posts less than 25K words are not his.
Muslim leaders and Imams are endorsing Trump in Michigan, and the Philadelphia Firefighters Union just endorsed him too. These are voters and voting blocs that have been reliable Dem supporters in the past.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-earns-endorsement-highly-respected-muslim-leaders-battleground-state
I don’t know what will be enough to counter 10 million illegal aliens, at least, that Biden allowed to pour across the open border. Elections are often very close, and this election is a tight race. Some races are won by thousands.
The DMV automatically registers people to vote. All it takes is for the wrong box to be checked on citizenship, and that person is registered to vote. Biden’s DOJ is hard at work to ensure at least some illegal aliens and other non citizens vote in this election. For example, the DOJ sued Virginia to reinstate voters that had self-identified as non citizens, even though most of them used immigration paperwork to verify identity. There are also lawsuits against using ID to vote. California Governor Gavin Newsom just signed a law that banned voter ID entirely.
Unless you are ready with actual numbers of ineligible voters who have registered, the % of them who will risk getting caught and deported if they vote, and the breakdown of “non citizens” into legal (green card) vs. illegal immigrants who improperly registered, this is just mostly speculative grievance.
We need facts and numbers to judge whether the system is secured against illegal voting. You can help by asking quantitative questions of election officials. I’m not ready to agree or disagree with your post until I have those numbers.
Registering to vote as a non citizen is a crime.
” illegal immigrants who improperly registered, this is just mostly speculative grievance.”
Illegal immigrants who improperly registered and were caught are the tip of the iceberg. Democrat aims are to increase those numbers, and that is why Democrats refuse voter ID.
It’s worth being concerned about, and blocking any movement legally to enfranchise illegals.
But, we don’t need to wade into deceptive infowarfare (“Illegal immigrants who improperly registered and were caught are the tip of the iceberg.”)
When you present a speculative grievance as extent fact, you are participating in public fraud. The truth is enough. The key factual question: How many ineligible voters voted in 2020, 22? How many are planning to vote this time? If it’s less than 100 across the US, that’s different from 1000, different from 10,000.
Nobody is going to argue that the number is zero. But, that’s not realistic. Research this question, and give us a number.
Here’s my analysis: In 2021, the AP did a state-by-state audit, and found that around 500 attempts to vote illegally were documented in 2020 election, or an average of 10 / state. Most of these were voting a dead spouse’s final wishes, and people voting in two states. There were some ineligible felons. The number ineligible illegal immigrants was very small — too small to matter.
And that’s how we want it to remain.
“But, we don’t need to wade into deceptive info warfare (“Illegal immigrants who improperly registered and were caught are the tip of the iceberg.”
Pbinca, look at the news. Look at how the Democrats block any voter ID. Look at how Democrats are fighting to keep non-citizens, legal and illegal, on the voter rolls. Look at how the Democrats are flooding the country with immigrants. This is not deceptive information warfare. This is what is happening that Democrats wish to convince Americans doesn’t exist. That is a lie.
“When you present a speculative grievance as extent fact, you are participating in public fraud.”
You are presenting speculative grievance in the face of fact and evidence. You are a public fraud and cannot defend yourself.
This Blog has been inundated with such numbers. You think, like most Democrats of today, that pretending something doesn’t exist means it doesn’t exist. That pretending is seen in young children and is why our country is being run so poorly.
“AP did a state-by-state audit, and found that around 500 attempts to vote illegally were documented in 2020 election, or an average of 10 / state. “
The AP is not a source of good information. They have proven that with the rest of the mainstream media. Skip all the junk you like to read, which is selective when looking at things. Look at actual videos showing the illegalities occurring. I will point you to two. 2.000 mules and James O’keefe’s videos on election fraud, and others on the blog, have provided more evidence than you can manage. These were brought up numerous times, but you want others to prove the facts you refused to contest when presented.
You are engaging in public fraud, and your defense is that of a four-year-old who has closed her eyes.
Who’s Behind Biden-Harris DOJ’s Move to Put 6,000 Noncitizens Back on the Voter Rolls? [in Virginia]
Now, less than a month before Election Day, the Biden-Harris administration’s Justice Department is suing in hopes of restoring 6,303 noncitizens to Virginia’s voter rolls who were removed in August.
—-
The article can be read in full by Pbinca so she can get up to speed and stop trying to minimize the crimes of the Democrat Party. Pbinca attempts to sound fair and balanced but in reality suffers from TDS and has become unhinged.
The closer we get to a Trump election, the more ridiculous nonsense Pea brain comes up with. She is as much a Trump hater as Gigi, but tries to disguise it with this disinegenuous both side-ism.
Pea brain is going to lose her mind, just like Gigenius.
If voter fraud were not a reality, Richard Nixon would have become the 35th President of the United States.
This is true. His VP Johnson took over and got 50,000 of my generation killed in Vietnam. Vote fraud is not a victimless crime.
Honestly, the numbers don’t matter to me. Any illegal vote, whether for repubs or dems steals a vote from a legal voter. I hope Virginia will prosecute anyone that illegally votes. That is the way to stop it.
* Having to be a citizen to vote is racist, elitist and discrimination, bigotry!
One thing is for sure, it’s a fact, not even an opinion: Kamala is historic in being an historically awful candidate, not even Dukakis was anywhere near as bad, and in the will-miracles-never-cease department, she picked a running mate who is even a worse candidate than her. The pair is the nuclear bomb of awfulness. When they get jammed together on one ticket, it becomes a thermonuclear explosion of horrible.