4 ms·
Then you haven’t paid close attention. He didn’t permit the paper to endorse for President. For fucks sake.
by Henchman21 1y ago
Then you haven’t paid close attention. He didn’t permit the paper to endorse for President. For fucks sake.
- guywithahat 1y agoYeah, because that's a dumb, partisan thing to do
- wiml 1y agoIt's normal and expected for a paper's editorial board to publish endorsements. The Washington Post had been doing so for decades, and had one ready-to-go until Bezos stepped in and nixed it.
- Snow_Falls 1y agoIt's a dumb partisan thing to do that the newspaper chose to do, and Bezos decreed they weren't allowed to. Not exactly "hands off" behaviour is it?
- guywithahat 1y agoI feel like you should read my original comment before responding
- Henchman21 1y agoIt’s neither? Having an editorial board issue an endorsement is something media outlets have always done. That alone doesn’t make it smart of course, traditions are often goofy! But registering an opinion on what would be best for the nation is explicitly what an editorial board is setup to do: offer opinions on the ongoing state of affairs. I will grant you that it is partisan, but until very recently that wasn’t even remotely a problem. Its only a “problem” now because one party has decided that they’re right all the time and will brook no deviation from the course they’re trying to set. Had the board been willing to endorse Trump, 110% Bezos would have allowed it. But let’s be honest: partisanship is only a problem when someone disagrees with your take. Then it’s all pearl-clutching and “won’t somebody think of the children!!”. So I find your comment disingenuous on its face.