Alice Shen
Rows of red, watchful eyes emerge from the darkness behind, observing and controlling the dialogue output by the speaker in the foreground.
In the lead-up to the Nov. 5 presidential election, Jeff Bezos halted the Washington Post’s endorsement for Vice President Harris. This move prompted multiple departures from the Post’s editorial board and set a dangerous precedent for journalism.
Bezos’ intervention makes the 2024 Presidential election the first since 1988 that the Washington Post’s editorial board has not released a public endorsement of a candidate.
Bezos wrote in an OpEd published in the Washington Post that his decision was made in an attempt to prevent a perception of political bias from the Post and build public trust.
Likening newspapers to voting machines, Bezos wrote, “Likewise with newspapers. We must be accurate, and we must be believed to be accurate. It’s a bitter pill to swallow, but we are failing on the second requirement.”
Despite Bezos’ claim of seeking a public perception of impartiality for the Post, there is a clear financial motive for Bezos to sequester political opinion from the Post’s editorial board that would be unfavorable to an incoming Trump administration.
As the owner of multiple companies providing services to the government such as Amazon, which provides web services, and Blue Origin, Bezos’ space company which aims to earn national security space launch contracts, Bezos has a direct benefit and financial interest in staying in the good graces of an incoming Trump administration.
Jeff Bezos purchased the Washington Post in 2013 amid a flurry of billionaire media acquisitions in the 2010’s. In the wake of the purchase, the Post faced criticism over the potential for change in editorial direction as it may become more favorable to billionaire interests, while others claimed that the action was simply philanthropic and his ownership would have no impact on the Post’s coverage.
With Bezos’ interference, it can be said that any assertions that he would not meddle in the Post’s coverage were patently false. While not an endorsement of Trump, stopping the board from endorsing Vice President Harris is nothing short of Bezos hedging his bets in an attempt to stay in the good graces of an incoming Trump administration.
President Trump has made repeated attacks on the media in his statements and at his rallies. Now to stay in the good favor of the president, billionaire media owners are faced with a conflict; defending a free and open press in the United States, or serving their own personal interests and potentially undermining a foundational element of our democracy.
Trump’s victory in the presidential election will likely herald further media censorship from billionaire owners who seek to protect their financial interests, and potentially invite political actors to acquire media outlets and reshape their coverage to be more favorable to a second Trump administration.
In effect, this would take journalistic publications and degrade them into glorified PR outlets that advocate for whatever benefits their billionaire owner’s personal financial interests.
Bezos’ meddling with the Washington Post is what journalistic ethics exist to prevent: conflicts of interest. If a free and open press is to survive on a national scale, billionaire media moguls like Bezos must be disconnected from editorial control over these outlets and have their financial involvement limited to donorship, not ownership.