6 ms·

200K left but some other might also join. And if taking no stance makes your audiences leave, it might just be a symptom of an existing condition. BTW, I do no

200K left but some other might also join. And if taking no stance makes your audiences leave, it might just be a symptom of an existing condition. BTW, I do not think Bezos needs npr to remind him the financial consequences.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
rootusrootus 2y ago
> if taking no stance makes your audiences leave Do you really think that is why people are leaving?
throwaway314155 2y ago
> BTW, I do not think Bezos needs npr to remind him the financial consequences. The story is newsworthy. I seriously doubt people at NPR are trying to...communicate directly with Jeff Bezos via...journalism?
ceejayoz 2y ago
> 200K left but some other might also join. News media keeps making this mistake - "if we go centrist enough the right-wing will join us!" It never works. Even Fox News is losing viewers to further-right outlets. Nothing the WaPo does is going to please the MAGAs - certainly not to the point of paying for a newspaper! - but they can piss off their existing readership (and staff). > And if taking no stance makes your audiences leave Taking no stance after taking a stance every election for almost fifty years is a choice.
- skissane 2y ago
  > News media keeps making this mistake - "if we go centrist enough the right-wing will join us!" It never works. There are right-wingers who read the NYT for Ross Douthat. > Even Fox News is losing viewers to further-right outlets. Fox News is rather low-brow, and further right stuff like OANN is even more low-brow. Not the kind of thing who attracts the more intellectual right-winger who reads First Things, Commentary (in its current neoconservative incarnation, not decades ago when it was still left-leaning), The American Conservative, Compact (which isn't purely conservative, more a strange medley where you'll find a Marxist on one page and a Catholic theocrat on the next), even National Review. But they might read NYT for Douthat. WaPo has Jennifer Rubin, but she seems much less conservative nowadays that Douthat does. Rubin's current output seems to be mainly targeted at liberals who are looking for a conservative who agrees with them.
  - ceejayoz 2y ago
    > There are right-wingers who read the NYT for Ross Douthat. Sure. Shades of Tobias in Arrested Development, though; “there are dozens of us!”
    - skissane 2y ago
      I wonder how much NYT is paying Douthat? I doubt he's struggling. And they've been doing so for about 15 years now. NYT wouldn't be paying him if they didn't think he was attracting readers.
      - NoGravitas 2y ago
        Unless they derive some other benefit from paying him; insurance against attacks from conservative politicians might be worth paying a few right-wing columnists.
rimunroe 2y ago
> And if taking no stance makes your audiences leave, it might just be a symptom of an existing condition. This is not why I or anyone else I know cancelled. We cancelled because the owner of the Post overruled the editorial board, which is extremely concerning
- Haven880 2y ago
  [flagged]
bediger4000 2y ago
Apparently WaPo had a 2024 growth of 4,000 new subs. These hypothetical new subscribers that want no endorsements will be lost in the noise.
jaredklewis 2y ago
> 200K left but some other might also join. Who would join? All the staff is the same as before; if you didn't like their journalism before, why would you like it now? The only difference is that we now know that Bezos has the editorial board on a leash. Would the anti-Trump crowd flock to Fox News if it came out the Murdoch's killed a Trump endorsement? Not likely.
rsynnott 2y ago
Wouldn’t bet on many subscribing because of this. Subscriptions to quality newspapers is a niche enough business, and in that world ‘ownership controls editorial policy’ is not a good look; that’s more of a tabloid thing traditionally. Like, even in Murdoch-land, while I don’t think anyone believes the tabloids have editorial independence, the WSJ was able to do its Theranos investigation (Murdoch was an investor in Theranos).

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

rootusrootus 2y ago

> if taking no stance makes your audiences leave Do you really think that is why people are leaving?

throwaway314155 2y ago

> BTW, I do not think Bezos needs npr to remind him the financial consequences. The story is newsworthy. I seriously doubt people at NPR are trying to...communicate directly with Jeff Bezos via...journalism?

ceejayoz 2y ago

> 200K left but some other might also join. News media keeps making this mistake - "if we go centrist enough the right-wing will join us!" It never works. Even Fox News is losing viewers to further-right outlets. Nothing the WaPo does is going to please the MAGAs - certainly not to the point of paying for a newspaper! - but they can piss off their existing readership (and staff). > And if taking no stance makes your audiences leave Taking no stance after taking a stance every election for almost fifty years is a choice.

skissane 2y ago
> News media keeps making this mistake - "if we go centrist enough the right-wing will join us!" It never works. There are right-wingers who read the NYT for Ross Douthat. > Even Fox News is losing viewers to further-right outlets. Fox News is rather low-brow, and further right stuff like OANN is even more low-brow. Not the kind of thing who attracts the more intellectual right-winger who reads First Things, Commentary (in its current neoconservative incarnation, not decades ago when it was still left-leaning), The American Conservative, Compact (which isn't purely conservative, more a strange medley where you'll find a Marxist on one page and a Catholic theocrat on the next), even National Review. But they might read NYT for Douthat. WaPo has Jennifer Rubin, but she seems much less conservative nowadays that Douthat does. Rubin's current output seems to be mainly targeted at liberals who are looking for a conservative who agrees with them.
- ceejayoz 2y ago
  > There are right-wingers who read the NYT for Ross Douthat. Sure. Shades of Tobias in Arrested Development, though; “there are dozens of us!”
  - skissane 2y ago
    I wonder how much NYT is paying Douthat? I doubt he's struggling. And they've been doing so for about 15 years now. NYT wouldn't be paying him if they didn't think he was attracting readers.
    - NoGravitas 2y ago
      Unless they derive some other benefit from paying him; insurance against attacks from conservative politicians might be worth paying a few right-wing columnists.

rimunroe 2y ago

> And if taking no stance makes your audiences leave, it might just be a symptom of an existing condition. This is not why I or anyone else I know cancelled. We cancelled because the owner of the Post overruled the editorial board, which is extremely concerning

Haven880 2y ago
[flagged]

bediger4000 2y ago

Apparently WaPo had a 2024 growth of 4,000 new subs. These hypothetical new subscribers that want no endorsements will be lost in the noise.

jaredklewis 2y ago

> 200K left but some other might also join. Who would join? All the staff is the same as before; if you didn't like their journalism before, why would you like it now? The only difference is that we now know that Bezos has the editorial board on a leash. Would the anti-Trump crowd flock to Fox News if it came out the Murdoch's killed a Trump endorsement? Not likely.

rsynnott 2y ago

Wouldn’t bet on many subscribing because of this. Subscriptions to quality newspapers is a niche enough business, and in that world ‘ownership controls editorial policy’ is not a good look; that’s more of a tabloid thing traditionally. Like, even in Murdoch-land, while I don’t think anyone believes the tabloids have editorial independence, the WSJ was able to do its Theranos investigation (Murdoch was an investor in Theranos).