Jeff Bezos defends Washington Post’s decision to stop presidential endorsements days before election

presidential endorsements create the "perception of bias"

You know what else creates a perception of bias? Meeting with Trump right before withholding the Harris endorsement.

Also... bullshit... it's amazing how many people just get their marching instructions from their preferred newspaper. They don't even pay attention. They will literally tell canvassers that they will decide who they are voting for based on what the paper says.

Now more than ever the world needs a credible, trusted, independent voice...

I’m not sure he understands the meaning of “independent”.

So didn't the crucial reporting of Woodward and Bernstein exposing the Watergate scandal on the pages of the Washington Post show bias against Nixon, Jeff? Would you have stopped that reporting had you owned the paper in 1972?

Fuck you, Jeff.

Bezos is a fascist

Fuck off Nazi, never another penny

"Democracy died in broad daylight"

If there are two parties, and one says it's raining, and the other says it isn't, it's not the news media's job to give an unbiased report on the debate, it's their job to look out the fucking window and say whether or not it's raining.

Tax your rich assholes America.

"Democracy dies with billionaires."

God he is such a fucking tool, and he doesn’t even realize it

Huh. Weird. Bezos’s face is different from how it used to be. He’s definitely gotten gender affirming surgery (testosterone or some cheek squaring plastic surgery)

World's second most punchable face.

Smells like an anti-editorial absolutist. Wow so objective. Much truth.

Wtf is wrong with being biased against out and proud fascists.

Dear God, his transformation into Dr Evil is nearly complete!

"I'll give you an endorsement for Harris... For ONE HUNDRED BILLION DOLLARS!! Muahahaha!!!"

"Dave Limp, the chief executive of one of my companies, Blue Origin, met with former president Donald Trump on the day of our announcement," Bezos wrote. "I sighed when I found out, because I knew it would provide ammunition to those who would like to frame this as anything other than a principled decision. But the fact is, I didn’t know about the meeting beforehand. Even Limp didn’t know about it in advance; the meeting was scheduled quickly that morning. There is no connection between it and our decision on presidential endorsements, and any suggestion otherwise is false."

"Presidential endorsements do nothing to tip the scales of an election. No undecided voters in Pennsylvania are going to say, 'I’m going with Newspaper A’s endorsement.' None. What presidential endorsements actually do is create a perception of bias. A perception of non-independence. Ending them is a principled decision, and it’s the right one," Bezos wrote

"Who are you gonna believe, me or your lying eyes?"

how exactly is it that any kind of endorsement creates a “perception of bias”? is he trying to argue that all opinions are biased? and if so, why doesn’t he say anything to support that claim?

I would read what he wrote, but I already canceled my subscription. Alas.

The number of subscriptions has gone down by 10% already. That's what happens when billionaires interfere with media, apparently.

If literally nobody gives a shit about the endorsement then blocking it is a pointless gesture and not going to increase credibility with anyone by his own admission, Is what I would say if it wasn't obviously another billionaire oligarch putting his finger on the scale of democracy then saying it isn't or it's justified.

Guys, relax, what I did was totally the right thing to do, The New York Times is about to post 5 articles about it.... or else.

• Papa Money

Is this Streisand effect going on? By not endorsing they got more people engaged then if they had?