4 ms·
Amazon's job was not to be political. The WP's job is. I wouldn't draw analogies from one to the other.
by Tichy 13y ago
Amazon's job was not to be political. The WP's job is. I wouldn't draw analogies from one to the other.
- rz2k 13y agoI don't see how this article could neglect to address that Jeff Bezos bought the paper himself, rather than having Amazon buy it. Also, for it to mention Bill Gates without contrasting what he did to the tech world through Microsoft during the 90s with what he is accomplishing for the whole world as a philanthropist now is striking. The mistake may have been inexcusable for anyone who believes that transparency leads to better governance, but it was one decision, and we now know that every company we thought had a whole set of established practices as common carriers eventually caved to the federal government. I don't think it's clear internet infrastructure providers experienced less pressure from the Fed than the press did in the 1970s. Bezos may also have considered his obligations to the stock holders of a public company without the context of something equivalent to journalistic ethics. Anyway, I'd agree that we don't actually know what role he'll play with the Washington Post, or what he will do during the next 30 years, but we also don't know whether he'll be courageous or not in journalism from one incident.