Everyone, please comment on Bezos' piece in WaPo!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Self-serving twaddle. Bezos simply didn't want to get on Trump's bad side and tried to split the baby.

We, as consumers of news, get what we tolerate, especially in this era of corporate media. I cancelled, after having read the paper all my life.

Cancellation is counterproductive.

Unless, of course, you want Fox News/CNN style "journalism" to capture a larger market share. Talk about "twaddle".

WaPo is wildly imperfect. It's also among the very best daily reporting available.

I loathe Trump and I will absolutely, positively continue to subscribe to the Post.

We get the media we tolerate. Acquiescing simply continues the cycle.

This assumes that whatever replaces our current media will be an improvement.

All evidence that I see indicates exactly the opposite.

Kill the Post? We'll end up with something far, far worse.

And I won't subscribe to those either.

[Anonymous]

I think it makes total sense. They don’t like Trump. I think a bunch of people at WaPo simply assumed they would endorse Kamala but a lot of people don’t like Kamala and her policies are unpopular so they decided maybe they shouldn’t be endorsing either. Then maybe someone said that maybe they shouldn’t be doing this at all ever. And the libs went crazy. I got the post for 25 years. I stopped in about 2010 when it just went over the edge pro everything D and anti R. It went from lightly biased to heavily unabashedly biased. So I canceled because I want news, not opinion. Bezos maybe finally realized it’s time to steer it back to the middle or just shut it all down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Self-serving twaddle. Bezos simply didn't want to get on Trump's bad side and tried to split the baby.

We, as consumers of news, get what we tolerate, especially in this era of corporate media. I cancelled, after having read the paper all my life.

Cancellation is counterproductive.

Unless, of course, you want Fox News/CNN style "journalism" to capture a larger market share. Talk about "twaddle".

WaPo is wildly imperfect. It's also among the very best daily reporting available.

I loathe Trump and I will absolutely, positively continue to subscribe to the Post.

We get the media we tolerate. Acquiescing simply continues the cycle.

This assumes that whatever replaces our current media will be an improvement.

All evidence that I see indicates exactly the opposite.

Kill the Post? We'll end up with something far, far worse.

And I won't subscribe to those either.

Great. So you'll be getting your "news" from TikTok?

You're cutting off your nose to spite your face. It's foolish.

[Anonymous]

Pp here. I guess my point is that when there is no question who a paper will endorse, then the endorsement has no meaning. Bezos just embraced that.

[Anonymous]

The news is supposed to be objective and report on the news. You know, the facts.

So why would a newspaper abandon that and support a candidate , thus alienating 1/2 their base and calls into question all their news stories for obvious bias

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The news is supposed to be objective and report on the news. You know, the facts.

So why would a newspaper abandon that and support a candidate , thus alienating 1/2 their base and calls into question all their news stories for obvious bias

The endorsements are part of the editorial and opinion pages. The post has endorsed candidates for decades.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The news is supposed to be objective and report on the news. You know, the facts.

So why would a newspaper abandon that and support a candidate , thus alienating 1/2 their base and calls into question all their news stories for obvious bias

The endorsements are part of the editorial and opinion pages. The post has endorsed candidates for decades.

And it always endorses democrats so no one cares anymore. No one is surprised or puts any stock in it. It just confirms what we all know… it’s a super biased paper. The entire editorial board is a bunch of left wing liberals and it shows in their articles. And almost no one who isn’t a hard line lefty subscribes anymore. Bezos is running a business and selling a newspaper is hard enough these days. Selling a product that only appeals to half the population at most isn’t a good strategy. And also, Kamala is legit bad. Really bad. So it was time to cut it off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it makes total sense. They don’t like Trump. I think a bunch of people at WaPo simply assumed they would endorse Kamala but a lot of people don’t like Kamala and her policies are unpopular so they decided maybe they shouldn’t be endorsing either. Then maybe someone said that maybe they shouldn’t be doing this at all ever. And the libs went crazy. I got the post for 25 years. I stopped in about 2010 when it just went over the edge pro everything D and anti R. It went from lightly biased to heavily unabashedly biased. So I canceled because I want news, not opinion. Bezos maybe finally realized it’s time to steer it back to the middle or just shut it all down.

BUT NOT 11 DAYS BEFORE THE ELECTION WHEN THE POST HAS ALREADY ENDORSED CANDIDATES THIS YEAR.

Bezos is clearly afraid of Trump sinking his businesses if he wins in retaliation of a Harris endorsement. He's a coward, and lying about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it makes total sense. They don’t like Trump. I think a bunch of people at WaPo simply assumed they would endorse Kamala but a lot of people don’t like Kamala and her policies are unpopular so they decided maybe they shouldn’t be endorsing either. Then maybe someone said that maybe they shouldn’t be doing this at all ever. And the libs went crazy. I got the post for 25 years. I stopped in about 2010 when it just went over the edge pro everything D and anti R. It went from lightly biased to heavily unabashedly biased. So I canceled because I want news, not opinion. Bezos maybe finally realized it’s time to steer it back to the middle or just shut it all down.

BUT NOT 11 DAYS BEFORE THE ELECTION WHEN THE POST HAS ALREADY ENDORSED CANDIDATES THIS YEAR.

Bezos is clearly afraid of Trump sinking his businesses if he wins in retaliation of a Harris endorsement. He's a coward, and lying about it.

DP.

By "clearly" you mean "I'm making a guess with no tangible evidence whatsoever"?

You're no different than the "election was stolen and FEMA controls hurricanes" crowd.

Stop it.

[Anonymous]

Bezos is obviously greedy and wants that sweet government contract money if Trump wins.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone else see WaPo’s TiK Tok account? They did a skit making fun of Bezos. Their staff is amazing and not taking this lightly.

Bezos should clean house and fire them all and rehire from the ground up taking a 50-50 split of left and right wing journalists.

Journalists should be neither left nor right. They should remain neutral and report the facts. This is called professional journalism. Left/right is a cable news entertainment.

[Anonymous]

Amazon plans to power Eastern Oregon data centers with nuclear reactors

In its quest to continue powering Eastern Oregon data centers, Amazon is going nuclear.

The e-commerce giant announced last week that it is partnering with several energy companies to develop small modular nuclear reactors, or SMRs. That includes an agreement with a consortium of Washington state utilities to develop and build reactors in southeast Washington that would help power data centers across the Columbia River in Umatilla and Morrow counties.

https://www.opb.org/article/2024/10/23/amazon-power-eastern-oregon-data-centers-nuclear-reactors/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The news is supposed to be objective and report on the news. You know, the facts.

So why would a newspaper abandon that and support a candidate , thus alienating 1/2 their base and calls into question all their news stories for obvious bias

The endorsements are part of the editorial and opinion pages. The post has endorsed candidates for decades.

And the Washington Post has always had opinions from both sides of the aisle. This was never a problem before. So why did Bezos suddenly decide it's a problem now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Amazon plans to power Eastern Oregon data centers with nuclear reactors

In its quest to continue powering Eastern Oregon data centers, Amazon is going nuclear.

The e-commerce giant announced last week that it is partnering with several energy companies to develop small modular nuclear reactors, or SMRs. That includes an agreement with a consortium of Washington state utilities to develop and build reactors in southeast Washington that would help power data centers across the Columbia River in Umatilla and Morrow counties.

https://www.opb.org/article/2024/10/23/amazon-power-eastern-oregon-data-centers-nuclear-reactors/

I have friends who work for the NRC. SMRs are not being blocked or considered all that controversial in the Biden-Harris administration. So I don't see how Bezos has anything to gain or lose on that front.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Bezos is obviously greedy and wants that sweet government contract money if Trump wins.

What would you have said if he endorsed Trump?