3 ms·

I know people were outraged over the WaPo not endorsing anybody but personally I wish newspapers would drop most columnists and also stop endorsing. I subscribe

I know people were outraged over the WaPo not endorsing anybody but personally I wish newspapers would drop most columnists and also stop endorsing. I subscribed to WaPo and WSJ for a year and reading the opinion columns was really bad for my mental state. You just get angry constantly. Now I am reading Reuters mostly and they are refreshingly boring in comparison

cafard 2y ago
Some years ago, I decided that if I could read the headline and the byline and then at least summarize the column, there was no point in reading an opinion piece. This has saved a good deal of time and stress.
maeil 2y ago
Would WaPo have stopped endorsing if it was set to endorse Bezos' favoured candidate? Of those that stopped endorsing, what's the ratio by candidate they would've endorsed? If only the outlets who were set to endorse candidate A stop doing so, but those for candidate B keep doing so, do you still consider this an improvement? From some philosophical PoV it might be, but in terms of real world consequences, I'm not sure how it can.
pyuser583 2y ago
It is hard to emphasize how insanely important editorials are for local news. It’s hard to emphasize how unimportant it is for national news.
llamaimperative 2y ago
How about WaPo choosing not endorse and then Blue Origin executives meeting with Trump the same day? Doesn’t have a fishy smell?
scrubs 2y ago
As other respondents to this wapo comment argue, dropping endorsement could be seen as net better. Can be argued a number of ways. However, I think it's worth pointing out what goes on at root: distrust and/or seeing oneself as having being manipulated. On this fulcrum the actual details, facts, intent etc is rendered irrelevant: if I feel the fool telling me 2+2=4 (a fact) will to me become more evidence of bs. The only way out in the current environment is to not get caught up emotionally in non falsafible stories, stick to facts, and regard anything from news that's not communicating data, facts as entertainment. Opinion makers are entertainment.

cafard 2y ago

Some years ago, I decided that if I could read the headline and the byline and then at least summarize the column, there was no point in reading an opinion piece. This has saved a good deal of time and stress.

maeil 2y ago

Would WaPo have stopped endorsing if it was set to endorse Bezos' favoured candidate? Of those that stopped endorsing, what's the ratio by candidate they would've endorsed? If only the outlets who were set to endorse candidate A stop doing so, but those for candidate B keep doing so, do you still consider this an improvement? From some philosophical PoV it might be, but in terms of real world consequences, I'm not sure how it can.

pyuser583 2y ago

It is hard to emphasize how insanely important editorials are for local news. It’s hard to emphasize how unimportant it is for national news.

llamaimperative 2y ago

How about WaPo choosing not endorse and then Blue Origin executives meeting with Trump the same day? Doesn’t have a fishy smell?

scrubs 2y ago

As other respondents to this wapo comment argue, dropping endorsement could be seen as net better. Can be argued a number of ways. However, I think it's worth pointing out what goes on at root: distrust and/or seeing oneself as having being manipulated. On this fulcrum the actual details, facts, intent etc is rendered irrelevant: if I feel the fool telling me 2+2=4 (a fact) will to me become more evidence of bs. The only way out in the current environment is to not get caught up emotionally in non falsafible stories, stick to facts, and regard anything from news that's not communicating data, facts as entertainment. Opinion makers are entertainment.