Wash Post—new editor from WSJ!?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Have you all forgotten that it was the WSJ that broke the Stormy Daniels story? Whatever you think of its editorials, their journalism is solid.

No it's not. 90% of it is propaganda from the RW garbage.

[Anonymous]

MAGA needs a new publication

EPOCH Times is a criminal enterprise. LOL

MAGA idiots.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’ve been a faithful reader for 40 years and just cancelled my subscription. Going to try NY Times. Maybe WaPo can get back on track. Maybe this editor can help.

NYT is no better

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve been a faithful reader for 40 years and just cancelled my subscription. Going to try NY Times. Maybe WaPo can get back on track. Maybe this editor can help.

The Grey Lady is over, too. Recently cancelled my subscription in favor of WSJ and Bloomberg.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Isn’t the newspaper going bankrupt? They have to do something different.

Go woke…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have always hated the “Democracy Dies in Darkness” tagline and would be thrilled to see that go.

It was Bezos's idea, so I don't think changing the editor is going to mean the end of the tagline.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a Democrat, a long time Post reader, and the WP is lucky to be getting a WSJ editor. No one writes news better than the reporters at WSJ. Crisp, succinct, who what when where why. The WP had been awful for years and desperately needs new leadership. Get rid of the fluff and go back to hard news.

The problem with the Post is obviously a lack of management control. They had the best newspaper editor in the country and they hated his guts because he only wanted them to high quality work, while the staff apparently wanted to produce content that competes with Refinery29 or Gawker. Marty Baron eventually had enough, the staff won, Bezos laid off all of the editors who knew what a newspaper was because they had high salaries and now the inmates are running the asylum.

This is some sort of weird fever dream. Marty Baron retired because he'd been a top editor of various newspapers for 20 years -- any one of which is a very high-pressure job -- and ran the Post during two contentious elections and a pandemic. And he was 67 years old. A lot of the "content that competes with Refinery29" was specifically produced by teams that Marty helped bring into existence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have you all forgotten that it was the WSJ that broke the Stormy Daniels story? Whatever you think of its editorials, their journalism is solid.

No it's not. 90% of it is propaganda from the RW garbage.

The WSJ is the only paper that can now say it broke a story that led to a felony conviction for Trump. That is opposite of right wing propaganda.

[Anonymous]

Bezos has gone Mar-aLago, yachts, and busty broads. Prove otherwise.

[Anonymous]

NYTs has all the gossipy quips:
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/03/business/media/washington-post-sally-buzbee-exit.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare&sgrp=c-cb

Basically it’s a full takeover of WaPo by a clique from the WSJ. But, tbh, WaPo was hemorrhaging money and subscribers.

[Anonymous]

Washington Post publisher and CEO William Lewis had a blunt message for his staff during a tense meeting following the sudden ouster of executive editor Sally Buzbee, according to the paper's own reporting.

Lewis informed his staff Sunday night that Buzbee, who joined the Post in 2021, was parting ways with the paper "effective immediately." He announced her temporary replacement would be former Wall Street Journal editor-in-chief Matt Murray, who is expected to hold the position through the 2024 election cycle, and that the paper was being restructured into "three newsrooms," in hopes of turning things around for the beleaguered "Democracy Dies in Darkness" publication.

The Washington Post reported Monday that "Buzbee was uncomfortable with the structure and did not believe she could be effective in the role" offered to her in a new division of the company. She also reportedly had urged Lewis to hold off on implementing such changes until after the election, which Lewis refused.

The dramatic changes "left the newsroom reeling," according to the Post.

Lewis, the British media executive who joined the Post earlier this year, addressed the restructuring in a tense newsroom meeting Monday, where he offered a grim assessment of the current state of the paper in what was described as a "heated exchange" with a staffer.

"Lewis warned that the newsroom cannot afford to be resistant to change, saying that ‘decisive, urgent’ actions are needed for the company to survive upheaval within the media industry and a recent loss of subscribers and revenue," the Post reported.

"We are going to turn this thing around, but let’s not sugarcoat it. It needs turning around," Lewis said. "We are losing large amounts of money. Your audience has halved in recent years. People are not reading your stuff. Right. I can’t sugarcoat it anymore."

[Anonymous]

Maybe their focus and priorities are what has caused a drop in subscribers......

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a Democrat, a long time Post reader, and the WP is lucky to be getting a WSJ editor. No one writes news better than the reporters at WSJ. Crisp, succinct, who what when where why. The WP had been awful for years and desperately needs new leadership. Get rid of the fluff and go back to hard news.

The problem with the Post is obviously a lack of management control. They had the best newspaper editor in the country and they hated his guts because he only wanted them to high quality work, while the staff apparently wanted to produce content that competes with Refinery29 or Gawker. Marty Baron eventually had enough, the staff won, Bezos laid off all of the editors who knew what a newspaper was because they had high salaries and now the inmates are running the asylum.

Similar accounts of the events at NYT and Vice have been published recently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve been a faithful reader for 40 years and just cancelled my subscription. Going to try NY Times. Maybe WaPo can get back on track. Maybe this editor can help.

The Grey Lady is over, too. Recently cancelled my subscription in favor of WSJ and Bloomberg.

Bloomberg is excellent. I also like the Financial Times. WSJ is mostly bad though.

I stick to financial journalism for news because they are just focused on reporting because the money guys need the facts to inform their investment decisions and their time is valuable.

Yes, because there would be no need, motivation, or demand for biased financial reporting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He's right. WaPo needs to get back to reporting and journalism and ease up on the editorializing and pontificating.

It used to be a good newspaper. Maybe it can be again.

Agree with you 100%.

We gave up entirely on the Post years ago after it became so preachy and obviously one-sided.

It is no longer a legitimate news outlet.