Pulitzer Prize-winning cartoonist Ann Telnaes resigned from the Washington Post after the paper refused to publish her cartoon depicting media and tech CEOs kneeling before Donald Trump. The Post’s opinions editor cited concerns about repetition of a similar column, a claim Telnaes disputed, asserting this was the first time a cartoon was rejected due to its subject matter. Telnaes argued this decision was dangerous for a free press, especially given the context of recent actions by other media outlets seemingly appeasing Trump. Her resignation follows the Post’s controversial decision to not endorse Kamala Harris, which resulted in significant subscriber losses.
Read More
The Washington Post’s decision to kill a cartoon by longtime editorial cartoonist Ann Telnaes, depicting Jeff Bezos and other tech billionaires alongside Donald Trump, resulted in Telnaes’ resignation. This action sparked outrage and debate, highlighting concerns about censorship and the influence of wealth on journalistic integrity.
The cartoon, a powerful visual commentary on the intersection of big tech and political power, was deemed too repetitive by the editors, who cited the recent publication of related columns. However, many felt this explanation was inadequate, particularly given Telnaes’ sixteen-year tenure and her reputation for insightful and impactful work. The perceived inconsistency in editorial standards raised questions about whether the decision was truly based on journalistic considerations or influenced by external pressures.… Continue reading
Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon and owner of The Washington Post, praised Donald Trump’s presidential victory, days after the Washington Post reportedly canceled an endorsement of Vice President Kamala Harris. Bezos attributed the decision to cancel the endorsement to a belief that endorsements have little impact on voters and contribute to the perception of media bias. The decision drew criticism from several Post reporters and subscribers, and the outlet reportedly lost 250,000 subscribers as a result. The Washington Post claims to have reverted to its original policy of not endorsing presidential candidates.
Read More
Jeff Bezos’ decision to override his own publisher and quash the Washington Post’s potential endorsement of Kamala Harris speaks to a larger issue that gnaws at the integrity of our democracy. The very notion that one individual—especially someone as staggeringly wealthy as Bezos—can wield such influence over an institution that is supposed to be a bastion of free press is alarming. It raises fundamental questions about who controls the narrative and whether our public discourse can be shaped by those with the deepest pockets rather than the concerns of everyday citizens.
The timing of this intervention is especially curious and contentious.… Continue reading
Over 200,000 subscribers fleeing the Washington Post after Jeff Bezos intervened to block a Harris endorsement reflects a chilling sentiment in our society about the role of billionaires in democracy. It raises vital questions about the independence of our media and who truly pays the price when such powerful figures wield their influence. Watching this unfold has led me to confront my own beliefs about the power dynamic at play between wealthy individuals and the institutions we rely on for unbiased information.
My own relationship with the Washington Post began a few years ago, when I sought a news outlet that seemed dedicated to reporting rather than just chasing ratings or pandering to political extremes.… Continue reading
People are furious, and who can blame them? The revelation that Jeff Bezos, the owner of The Washington Post, reportedly blocked the paper from endorsing Kamala Harris in the upcoming election has ignited a wildfire of anger among subscribers and staff alike. Reading through countless comments expressing outrage over this decision, I can’t help but feel that it marks a serious breach of trust and a disturbing trend of corporate manipulation in journalism.
I’ve been a subscriber to The Washington Post for several years, primarily because I value its commitment to investigative reporting and its willingness to hold power accountable. However, the idea that Bezos intervened to prevent a candidate endorsement feels like a shot across the bow of journalistic integrity.… Continue reading
The news that Jeff Bezos allegedly killed the Washington Post’s endorsement of Kamala Harris is a stark reminder of the power dynamics that operate within American media and politics. As a long-time reader of the Post, this situation fills me with a disconcerting mixture of anger and sadness. It underscores the uncomfortable reality that not only do billionaires have the power to shape narratives but also to silence certain voices in the public sphere. The fact that a publication built on the foundation of journalistic integrity is now swayed by its billionaire owner raises significant questions about the future of independent journalism in this country.… Continue reading
Democracy dies in cowardice, and the events surrounding Jeff Bezos’s decision to kill a Washington Post endorsement encapsulate this reality in stark relief. The audacity with which billionaires can stifle a crucial part of our democratic process is chilling. When a prominent publication drafts an endorsement for a presidential candidate, only for its billionaire owner to intervene and censor it, we are reminded how delicate our democratic fabric truly is. The very idea that Bezos would sit on this power, fearing backlash from an authoritarian figure like Donald Trump, speaks to a fear that ought not to exist in a leader of a free press.… Continue reading
The unfolding crisis at the Washington Post feels deeply personal to me. It’s not just about the resignation of an esteemed journalist like Robert Kagan or the discontent simmering among the editorial staff; it’s about a blow to an institution I deeply respect. Living in the D.C. area for over four decades, the Washington Post has been a constant in my life. My parents read it, I delivered it, and I have been a loyal subscriber. Watching its gradual transformation from a respected news organization to what some now perceive as a platform for billionaire interests feels like a betrayal.
The decision not to endorse Kamala Harris has become a watershed moment for the paper, one that highlights the intersection of media, money, and politics.… Continue reading
The decision by The Washington Post to abstain from endorsing a candidate in the 2024 presidential election after Jeff Bezos stepped in has left me unsettled, not just as a reader but as a citizen concerned about the future of our democracy. The complexities of media ownership and the intertwining interests of billionaires make it increasingly difficult to discern the truth from the agenda. When the editorial board of a storied institution like The Washington Post cannot voice its opinion on a critical election, we’re witnessing a troubling shift that feels both personal and troubling in a broader sense.
It’s remarkable to think that just decades ago, The Washington Post was synonymous with journalistic integrity and courage, famously exposing the Watergate scandal.… Continue reading
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood