Reply to Democracy Dies in Darkness

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "Democracy Dies in Darkness"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][twitter]https://x.com/TheMayaka/status/1849956724121206861[/twitter][/quote]

Yep. And already looking at ways to replace Amazon. Target subscription same day delivery works for a lot of it and we have already found that Costco is better than Amazon subscribe and save for most bulk items. [/quote]

Did this years ago. Target Same Day pickup has been useful too.[/quote]

Good. Target's CEO is pro life. Thank you.[/quote]

I don't care. I eat Chic Fil A. I have friends and family who are pro life.

I actually agree that news outlets could stop making endorsements.

But let me know when he pulls an editorial from a major newspaper endorsing a presidential candidate in the 11th hour because of  a business deal, then has the audacity to pretend it is about journalistic integrity. We all know that integrity was not the actual reason for the decision. It was a lie and it occurred because of bowing to pressure from a lying cheating person who wants to override the constitution and speaks like a fascist. [/quote]

This is overblown. At this point 99 percent of voters are decided. I don't know anyone who votes based on what a newspaper says. The Washington Post has been losing money and is no longer a powerful force in American politics.  [b]Social media has supplanted print media as the source of news for most people.[/b][/quote]

Setting aside that this is objectively horrifying...

It is not overblown to be disturbed that one of the richest men in the world, who owns a national newspaper, agreed to overrule his newspaper's editorial staff for a quid pro quo from the convicted felon who is running for president.[/quote]

Yes, this is the issue, not the endorsement itself. How can anyone read an article in the future and not be certain that Bezos tampered with it in some way? Or maybe a story never gets published? Sure, the odds are low but you can't say anymore that the odds are zero. And there goes any semblance of objectivity that WaPo had (regardless of your opinion of how much it had to begin with). I don't see how WaPo comes back from this ever unless Bezos sells.[/quote]

It's not coming back. They have been laying people off and cutting benefits since before Bezos. The only way a paper survives is with subscriptions, and people just are not willing to pay for the current product. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics