3 ms·
In a normal functioning democracy I would tend to agree, however, in this case the washington post itself has documented over 30.000 falsehoods claimed by Trump
by wkat4242 2y ago
In a normal functioning democracy I would tend to agree, however, in this case the washington post itself has documented over 30.000 falsehoods claimed by Trump: https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/trump-claims-database/?itid=lk_inline_manual_11&itid=lk_inline_manual_7 https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/trump-claim...
For this reason alone they have a good logical reason to endorse Harris.
Also, in this day and age it's impossible to be politically neutral. Especially the extreme-right makes such absurd claims that any serious paper would not publish them because they're simply untrue. This automatically pushes them into the other camp.
Anyway I think it's very poor showing that they caved to pressure from Bezos, however it's pretty clear which way the Washington Post leans. They don't need to endorse a candidate because we already know their opinion (especially in light of the list they have made above).
- WalterBright 2y agoReporting the news should be dispassionate, not advocacy.
- Sabinus 2y agoAre you aware of the difference between the reporting and editorial sections of a newspaper?
- WalterBright 2y agoYes. In the editorial sections, the paper's bias becomes more obvious. The reporting section is overseen by the same people, and the same bias is quite visible to the discerning reader.
- bediger4000 2y agoThat's very true in WaPo's case. They treated Trump extremely carefully, and also published very pro Trump editorials by Hugh Hewitt and Marc Thiessen. Their treatment of Biden, and then Harris, has not been so charitable.
- jubalfh 2y agolearn a bit of the history of journalism, and specifically of the history of american journalism and its connection to politics and voting, i dare you.