4 ms·

Because 2 and 3 aren't sufficient reason to overrule the decisions, and ~60 year old traditions, of your extremely prestigious newspaper, causing a LARGE drop i

• skissane 2y ago
  > Because 2 and 3 aren't sufficient reason Just because something is or isn’t a sufficient reason in your mind, doesn’t mean it is or isn’t one in the mind of Bezos. He’s making decisions based on different information, evidence, advisors, life experiences, values, etc. Also, you are judging it with the benefit of hindsight > and ~60 year old traditions, It isn’t a 60 year old tradition. Regular endorsements only started with their 1976 endorsement of Carter, which was only 48 years ago. And WaPo didn’t endorse either candidate in the 1988 election, which was only 36 years ago. It also endorsed Eisenhower in 1952 (72 years ago), but that was more of a once-off (they endorsed neither Truman nor Dewey in 1948; and despite endorsing Eisenhower over Stevenson in 1952, WaPo endorsed neither in their 1956 rematch.) > causing a LARGE drop in subscriber numbers. I don’t think Bezos was expecting that. I’m sure he was expecting some blowback, but I suspect he wasn’t expecting it to be this big. If he had foreseen it, would he have made a different decision? I don’t know. From what I’ve read, it sounds like Bezos and his WaPo executives had been planning a move like this for a while, but the disagreement was over timing - the executives wanted to wait until after the election to discontinue the tradition of presidential endorsements, Bezos decided he didn’t want to wait.