Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Love these people who claim to care about politics and public policy but won't subscribe to the Post. Apparently you don't care that much!
DP. I subscribe to the WSJ, Post and NYTimes. (and Bloomberg!). If the Post doesn’t have decent local news then there is truly no reason for me to keep my subscription. The only thing I will miss is Capitol Weather Gang but I guess I will just follow Matthew Capucci’s socials.
+1 there are tons of options. Democracy won’t die in darkness. I’m not subscribing because it used to be good.
There's only a handful of news organizations in the entire world that can match the Post.
Could not can. It is crap now.
The Post just won two Pulitzer prizes, after winning three the year before that, and three more in the year before that. You people are ridiculous.
All these idiots are mad about the editorial pages, which THEY NEVER EVEN READ IN THE FIRST PLACE.
Canceling your subscription and, in the process, destroying a newspaper because you're mad about the editorial page that most people completely ignored is just bizarre. Talk about the tail wagging the dog.
It's not about the editorial pages, you are missing the point. It's about the loss of local news, sports, and all the other things they have slashed today. I have the NYT and WSJ for national and international news. The Post was the local paper, with good coverage of the business of Washington (the government). Now it is going to just be the business of Washington. I don't need an expensive subscription for that when I can get that elsewhere.
We don't know all the people who were fired today but how many of those Pulitzer winners are still Post reporters? I think you are thinking the Post is the same as what it was a year ago or two years ago. It isn't even close.
More than 300,000 people canceled their subscriptions to the Post after Bezos killed the paper's endorsement of Kamala back in 2024. Those cancellations are what forced the paper to cut coverage of sports and local news and all the rest. Now you're canceling your subscription because it's not covering sports and local news and all the rest. If you and other people do that, that will force even more cuts in their coverage, which will prompt even more people to cancel their subscriptions. This is how newspapers die. Bezos surely deserves lots of blame. But so do all those people who canceled their subscriptions because that's what set off this downward spiral. And what exactly did canceling those subscriptions accomplish? Except for decimating one of the world's great news outlets and forcing the layoffs of many of the best journalists in the country, many of whom will surely now leave the profession?
Oh geez. What sent the Post on its spiral? It was its owner and management. Not the people who canceled subscriptions. Stop being an apologist for Bezos and company. You’re claiming the Post’s demise on the customers is absurd. And it’s exactly what Bezos and team want.
I feel for the many incredible journalists at the Post and would gladly pay for a subscription to their Substack or next publication. But not WaPo.
So mealy mouthed. You think it was, like, vibes that sent the Post on its spiral? No. It's money -- the money that stopped coming in when hundreds of thousands of people decided to cancel their subscriptions because (of all things) they were mad about the editorial page not endorsing Kamala. Before 2024, no one even gave a shit whom the Post endorsed in any presidential election. Those people had the right to cancel, of course, but they should also acknowledge that their protest didn't accomplish anything and created the dire situation the Post now finds itself in.
Sorry but it’s not my responsibility to pay for something I no longer read because it is no longer useful. The NYT seems to have been able to figure out how to drive subscriptions and clicks. Same with the WSJ.
If the public boycotted the Times or the Journal because of something stupid their owners did, like they did with the Post, the exact same thing would happen to the Times and Journal. They'd have to impose massive cuts in coverage, and then people would cancel because they didnt like the coverage anymore, and we'd be speculating about whether the Times and Journal would go under.
Sure, but so far that hasn’t happened. Bezos and Lewis have done this to the Post, not the former subscribers.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Love these people who claim to care about politics and public policy but won't subscribe to the Post. Apparently you don't care that much!
DP. I subscribe to the WSJ, Post and NYTimes. (and Bloomberg!). If the Post doesn’t have decent local news then there is truly no reason for me to keep my subscription. The only thing I will miss is Capitol Weather Gang but I guess I will just follow Matthew Capucci’s socials.
+1 there are tons of options. Democracy won’t die in darkness. I’m not subscribing because it used to be good.
There's only a handful of news organizations in the entire world that can match the Post.
Could not can. It is crap now.
The Post just won two Pulitzer prizes, after winning three the year before that, and three more in the year before that. You people are ridiculous.
All these idiots are mad about the editorial pages, which THEY NEVER EVEN READ IN THE FIRST PLACE.
Canceling your subscription and, in the process, destroying a newspaper because you're mad about the editorial page that most people completely ignored is just bizarre. Talk about the tail wagging the dog.
It's not about the editorial pages, you are missing the point. It's about the loss of local news, sports, and all the other things they have slashed today. I have the NYT and WSJ for national and international news. The Post was the local paper, with good coverage of the business of Washington (the government). Now it is going to just be the business of Washington. I don't need an expensive subscription for that when I can get that elsewhere.
We don't know all the people who were fired today but how many of those Pulitzer winners are still Post reporters? I think you are thinking the Post is the same as what it was a year ago or two years ago. It isn't even close.
More than 300,000 people canceled their subscriptions to the Post after Bezos killed the paper's endorsement of Kamala back in 2024. Those cancellations are what forced the paper to cut coverage of sports and local news and all the rest. Now you're canceling your subscription because it's not covering sports and local news and all the rest. If you and other people do that, that will force even more cuts in their coverage, which will prompt even more people to cancel their subscriptions. This is how newspapers die. Bezos surely deserves lots of blame. But so do all those people who canceled their subscriptions because that's what set off this downward spiral. And what exactly did canceling those subscriptions accomplish? Except for decimating one of the world's great news outlets and forcing the layoffs of many of the best journalists in the country, many of whom will surely now leave the profession?
Oh geez. What sent the Post on its spiral? It was its owner and management. Not the people who canceled subscriptions. Stop being an apologist for Bezos and company. You’re claiming the Post’s demise on the customers is absurd. And it’s exactly what Bezos and team want.
I feel for the many incredible journalists at the Post and would gladly pay for a subscription to their Substack or next publication. But not WaPo.
So mealy mouthed. You think it was, like, vibes that sent the Post on its spiral? No. It's money -- the money that stopped coming in when hundreds of thousands of people decided to cancel their subscriptions because (of all things) they were mad about the editorial page not endorsing Kamala. Before 2024, no one even gave a shit whom the Post endorsed in any presidential election. Those people had the right to cancel, of course, but they should also acknowledge that their protest didn't accomplish anything and created the dire situation the Post now finds itself in.
Sorry but it’s not my responsibility to pay for something I no longer read because it is no longer useful. The NYT seems to have been able to figure out how to drive subscriptions and clicks. Same with the WSJ.
If the public boycotted the Times or the Journal because of something stupid their owners did, like they did with the Post, the exact same thing would happen to the Times and Journal. They'd have to impose massive cuts in coverage, and then people would cancel because they didnt like the coverage anymore, and we'd be speculating about whether the Times and Journal would go under.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Love these people who claim to care about politics and public policy but won't subscribe to the Post. Apparently you don't care that much!
DP. I subscribe to the WSJ, Post and NYTimes. (and Bloomberg!). If the Post doesn’t have decent local news then there is truly no reason for me to keep my subscription. The only thing I will miss is Capitol Weather Gang but I guess I will just follow Matthew Capucci’s socials.
+1 there are tons of options. Democracy won’t die in darkness. I’m not subscribing because it used to be good.
There's only a handful of news organizations in the entire world that can match the Post.
Could not can. It is crap now.
The Post just won two Pulitzer prizes, after winning three the year before that, and three more in the year before that. You people are ridiculous.
All these idiots are mad about the editorial pages, which THEY NEVER EVEN READ IN THE FIRST PLACE.
Canceling your subscription and, in the process, destroying a newspaper because you're mad about the editorial page that most people completely ignored is just bizarre. Talk about the tail wagging the dog.
It's not about the editorial pages, you are missing the point. It's about the loss of local news, sports, and all the other things they have slashed today. I have the NYT and WSJ for national and international news. The Post was the local paper, with good coverage of the business of Washington (the government). Now it is going to just be the business of Washington. I don't need an expensive subscription for that when I can get that elsewhere.
We don't know all the people who were fired today but how many of those Pulitzer winners are still Post reporters? I think you are thinking the Post is the same as what it was a year ago or two years ago. It isn't even close.
More than 300,000 people canceled their subscriptions to the Post after Bezos killed the paper's endorsement of Kamala back in 2024. Those cancellations are what forced the paper to cut coverage of sports and local news and all the rest. Now you're canceling your subscription because it's not covering sports and local news and all the rest. If you and other people do that, that will force even more cuts in their coverage, which will prompt even more people to cancel their subscriptions. This is how newspapers die. Bezos surely deserves lots of blame. But so do all those people who canceled their subscriptions because that's what set off this downward spiral. And what exactly did canceling those subscriptions accomplish? Except for decimating one of the world's great news outlets and forcing the layoffs of many of the best journalists in the country, many of whom will surely now leave the profession?
Oh geez. What sent the Post on its spiral? It was its owner and management. Not the people who canceled subscriptions. Stop being an apologist for Bezos and company. You’re claiming the Post’s demise on the customers is absurd. And it’s exactly what Bezos and team want.
I feel for the many incredible journalists at the Post and would gladly pay for a subscription to their Substack or next publication. But not WaPo.
So mealy mouthed. You think it was, like, vibes that sent the Post on its spiral? No. It's money -- the money that stopped coming in when hundreds of thousands of people decided to cancel their subscriptions because (of all things) they were mad about the editorial page not endorsing Kamala. Before 2024, no one even gave a shit whom the Post endorsed in any presidential election. Those people had the right to cancel, of course, but they should also acknowledge that their protest didn't accomplish anything and created the dire situation the Post now finds itself in.
Sorry but it’s not my responsibility to pay for something I no longer read because it is no longer useful. The NYT seems to have been able to figure out how to drive subscriptions and clicks. Same with the WSJ.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's hilarious that all these people are canceling their subscriptions to the Post to protest Bezos, but those same people would never ever cancel their subscription to Amazon. Bezos doesn't make a dime from the Post. It's been losing money for years.
Cancel your subscription to Amazon, p*ssies. Don't take it out on the reporters who are just trying to tell you what is happening in your world.
+1000
Again, you can do two things at once: Cancel your subscription to a paper increasingly devoted to propping up the desires of the administration and, at the same time, stop ordering from Amazon.
Yes, the editorial page got more conservative but the Washington Post itself, the news pages, is not -- in any way, shape or form -- trying to prop up the desires of the administration. The news section, which is the section everyone cares about and actually reads, is strictly nonpartisan.
Bless your heart.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Love these people who claim to care about politics and public policy but won't subscribe to the Post. Apparently you don't care that much!
DP. I subscribe to the WSJ, Post and NYTimes. (and Bloomberg!). If the Post doesn’t have decent local news then there is truly no reason for me to keep my subscription. The only thing I will miss is Capitol Weather Gang but I guess I will just follow Matthew Capucci’s socials.
+1 there are tons of options. Democracy won’t die in darkness. I’m not subscribing because it used to be good.
There's only a handful of news organizations in the entire world that can match the Post.
Could not can. It is crap now.
The Post just won two Pulitzer prizes, after winning three the year before that, and three more in the year before that. You people are ridiculous.
All these idiots are mad about the editorial pages, which THEY NEVER EVEN READ IN THE FIRST PLACE.
Canceling your subscription and, in the process, destroying a newspaper because you're mad about the editorial page that most people completely ignored is just bizarre. Talk about the tail wagging the dog.
It's not about the editorial pages, you are missing the point. It's about the loss of local news, sports, and all the other things they have slashed today. I have the NYT and WSJ for national and international news. The Post was the local paper, with good coverage of the business of Washington (the government). Now it is going to just be the business of Washington. I don't need an expensive subscription for that when I can get that elsewhere.
We don't know all the people who were fired today but how many of those Pulitzer winners are still Post reporters? I think you are thinking the Post is the same as what it was a year ago or two years ago. It isn't even close.
More than 300,000 people canceled their subscriptions to the Post after Bezos killed the paper's endorsement of Kamala back in 2024. Those cancellations are what forced the paper to cut coverage of sports and local news and all the rest. Now you're canceling your subscription because it's not covering sports and local news and all the rest. If you and other people do that, that will force even more cuts in their coverage, which will prompt even more people to cancel their subscriptions. This is how newspapers die. Bezos surely deserves lots of blame. But so do all those people who canceled their subscriptions because that's what set off this downward spiral. And what exactly did canceling those subscriptions accomplish? Except for decimating one of the world's great news outlets and forcing the layoffs of many of the best journalists in the country, many of whom will surely now leave the profession?
Oh geez. What sent the Post on its spiral? It was its owner and management. Not the people who canceled subscriptions. Stop being an apologist for Bezos and company. You’re claiming the Post’s demise on the customers is absurd. And it’s exactly what Bezos and team want.
I feel for the many incredible journalists at the Post and would gladly pay for a subscription to their Substack or next publication. But not WaPo.
So mealy mouthed. You think it was, like, vibes that sent the Post on its spiral? No. It's money -- the money that stopped coming in when hundreds of thousands of people decided to cancel their subscriptions because (of all things) they were mad about the editorial page not endorsing Kamala. Before 2024, no one even gave a shit whom the Post endorsed in any presidential election. Those people had the right to cancel, of course, but they should also acknowledge that their protest didn't accomplish anything and created the dire situation the Post now finds itself in.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:DH is a journalist (not at WaPo) and we are unsure if we will keep our subscription. I can’t read their opinion section anymore and some of the news coverage is clearly being influenced. And the layoffs are not about becoming more competitive, as the editor claimed. How can we support that with our subscription?
But…it’s the WaPo. It is irreplaceable. And the journalists who remain will only be hurt by cancelling. So we feel stuck. God, I hate Bezos.
I will always subscribe to the Washington Post no matter what. Democracies cannot function without newspapers. No one else cannot replace the Post. Yes, it's a dark time for the paper, but the Trump era will be over soon enough and I want the Post to still be here when he's gone.
Hopefully Bezos will sell The Post, sooner, rather than later. What did he spend on that ridiculous vanity rockumentary on Melania - $60 million? That would have paid a lot of reporters, for better effort, at The Post.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Love these people who claim to care about politics and public policy but won't subscribe to the Post. Apparently you don't care that much!
DP. I subscribe to the WSJ, Post and NYTimes. (and Bloomberg!). If the Post doesn’t have decent local news then there is truly no reason for me to keep my subscription. The only thing I will miss is Capitol Weather Gang but I guess I will just follow Matthew Capucci’s socials.
+1 there are tons of options. Democracy won’t die in darkness. I’m not subscribing because it used to be good.
There's only a handful of news organizations in the entire world that can match the Post.
Could not can. It is crap now.
The Post just won two Pulitzer prizes, after winning three the year before that, and three more in the year before that. You people are ridiculous.
All these idiots are mad about the editorial pages, which THEY NEVER EVEN READ IN THE FIRST PLACE.
Canceling your subscription and, in the process, destroying a newspaper because you're mad about the editorial page that most people completely ignored is just bizarre. Talk about the tail wagging the dog.
It's not about the editorial pages, you are missing the point. It's about the loss of local news, sports, and all the other things they have slashed today. I have the NYT and WSJ for national and international news. The Post was the local paper, with good coverage of the business of Washington (the government). Now it is going to just be the business of Washington. I don't need an expensive subscription for that when I can get that elsewhere.
We don't know all the people who were fired today but how many of those Pulitzer winners are still Post reporters? I think you are thinking the Post is the same as what it was a year ago or two years ago. It isn't even close.
More than 300,000 people canceled their subscriptions to the Post after Bezos killed the paper's endorsement of Kamala back in 2024. Those cancellations are what forced the paper to cut coverage of sports and local news and all the rest. Now you're canceling your subscription because it's not covering sports and local news and all the rest. If you and other people do that, that will force even more cuts in their coverage, which will prompt even more people to cancel their subscriptions. This is how newspapers die. Bezos surely deserves lots of blame. But so do all those people who canceled their subscriptions because that's what set off this downward spiral. And what exactly did canceling those subscriptions accomplish? Except for decimating one of the world's great news outlets and forcing the layoffs of many of the best journalists in the country, many of whom will surely now leave the profession?
Oh geez. What sent the Post on its spiral? It was its owner and management. Not the people who canceled subscriptions. Stop being an apologist for Bezos and company. You’re claiming the Post’s demise on the customers is absurd. And it’s exactly what Bezos and team want.
I feel for the many incredible journalists at the Post and would gladly pay for a subscription to their Substack or next publication. But not WaPo.
So mealy mouthed. You think it was, like, vibes that sent the Post on its spiral? No. It's money -- the money that stopped coming in when hundreds of thousands of people decided to cancel their subscriptions because (of all things) they were mad about the editorial page not endorsing Kamala. Before 2024, no one even gave a shit whom the Post endorsed in any presidential election. Those people had the right to cancel, of course, but they should also acknowledge that their protest didn't accomplish anything and created the dire situation the Post now finds itself in.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's hilarious that all these people are canceling their subscriptions to the Post to protest Bezos, but those same people would never ever cancel their subscription to Amazon. Bezos doesn't make a dime from the Post. It's been losing money for years.
Cancel your subscription to Amazon, p*ssies. Don't take it out on the reporters who are just trying to tell you what is happening in your world.
+1000
Again, you can do two things at once: Cancel your subscription to a paper increasingly devoted to propping up the desires of the administration and, at the same time, stop ordering from Amazon.
Yes, the editorial page got more conservative but the Washington Post itself, the news pages, is not -- in any way, shape or form -- trying to prop up the desires of the administration. The news section, which is the section everyone cares about and actually reads, is strictly nonpartisan.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's hilarious that all these people are canceling their subscriptions to the Post to protest Bezos, but those same people would never ever cancel their subscription to Amazon. Bezos doesn't make a dime from the Post. It's been losing money for years.
Cancel your subscription to Amazon, p*ssies. Don't take it out on the reporters who are just trying to tell you what is happening in your world.
+1000
Again, you can do two things at once: Cancel your subscription to a paper increasingly devoted to propping up the desires of the administration and, at the same time, stop ordering from Amazon.
Yes, the editorial page got more conservative but the Washington Post itself, the news pages, is not -- in any way, shape or form -- trying to prop up the desires of the administration. The news section, which is the section everyone cares about and actually reads, is strictly nonpartisan.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Love these people who claim to care about politics and public policy but won't subscribe to the Post. Apparently you don't care that much!
DP. I subscribe to the WSJ, Post and NYTimes. (and Bloomberg!). If the Post doesn’t have decent local news then there is truly no reason for me to keep my subscription. The only thing I will miss is Capitol Weather Gang but I guess I will just follow Matthew Capucci’s socials.
+1 there are tons of options. Democracy won’t die in darkness. I’m not subscribing because it used to be good.
There's only a handful of news organizations in the entire world that can match the Post.
Could not can. It is crap now.
The Post just won two Pulitzer prizes, after winning three the year before that, and three more in the year before that. You people are ridiculous.
All these idiots are mad about the editorial pages, which THEY NEVER EVEN READ IN THE FIRST PLACE.
Canceling your subscription and, in the process, destroying a newspaper because you're mad about the editorial page that most people completely ignored is just bizarre. Talk about the tail wagging the dog.
It's not about the editorial pages, you are missing the point. It's about the loss of local news, sports, and all the other things they have slashed today. I have the NYT and WSJ for national and international news. The Post was the local paper, with good coverage of the business of Washington (the government). Now it is going to just be the business of Washington. I don't need an expensive subscription for that when I can get that elsewhere.
We don't know all the people who were fired today but how many of those Pulitzer winners are still Post reporters? I think you are thinking the Post is the same as what it was a year ago or two years ago. It isn't even close.
More than 300,000 people canceled their subscriptions to the Post after Bezos killed the paper's endorsement of Kamala back in 2024. Those cancellations are what forced the paper to cut coverage of sports and local news and all the rest. Now you're canceling your subscription because it's not covering sports and local news and all the rest. If you and other people do that, that will force even more cuts in their coverage, which will prompt even more people to cancel their subscriptions. This is how newspapers die. Bezos surely deserves lots of blame. But so do all those people who canceled their subscriptions because that's what set off this downward spiral. And what exactly did canceling those subscriptions accomplish? Except for decimating one of the world's great news outlets and forcing the layoffs of many of the best journalists in the country, many of whom will surely now leave the profession?
Oh geez. What sent the Post on its spiral? It was its owner and management. Not the people who canceled subscriptions. Stop being an apologist for Bezos and company. You’re claiming the Post’s demise on the customers is absurd. And it’s exactly what Bezos and team want.
I feel for the many incredible journalists at the Post and would gladly pay for a subscription to their Substack or next publication. But not WaPo.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's hilarious that all these people are canceling their subscriptions to the Post to protest Bezos, but those same people would never ever cancel their subscription to Amazon. Bezos doesn't make a dime from the Post. It's been losing money for years.
Cancel your subscription to Amazon, p*ssies. Don't take it out on the reporters who are just trying to tell you what is happening in your world.
+1000
Again, you can do two things at once: Cancel your subscription to a paper increasingly devoted to propping up the desires of the administration and, at the same time, stop ordering from Amazon.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's hilarious that all these people are canceling their subscriptions to the Post to protest Bezos, but those same people would never ever cancel their subscription to Amazon. Bezos doesn't make a dime from the Post. It's been losing money for years.
Cancel your subscription to Amazon, p*ssies. Don't take it out on the reporters who are just trying to tell you what is happening in your world.
+1000
Anonymous wrote:I lived in DC for 15 years and rarely used the Post for local news. There are so many other hyper local sources of info if you're on social media.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Love these people who claim to care about politics and public policy but won't subscribe to the Post. Apparently you don't care that much!
DP. I subscribe to the WSJ, Post and NYTimes. (and Bloomberg!). If the Post doesn’t have decent local news then there is truly no reason for me to keep my subscription. The only thing I will miss is Capitol Weather Gang but I guess I will just follow Matthew Capucci’s socials.
+1 there are tons of options. Democracy won’t die in darkness. I’m not subscribing because it used to be good.
There's only a handful of news organizations in the entire world that can match the Post.
Could not can. It is crap now.
The Post just won two Pulitzer prizes, after winning three the year before that, and three more in the year before that. You people are ridiculous.
All these idiots are mad about the editorial pages, which THEY NEVER EVEN READ IN THE FIRST PLACE.
Canceling your subscription and, in the process, destroying a newspaper because you're mad about the editorial page that most people completely ignored is just bizarre. Talk about the tail wagging the dog.
It's not about the editorial pages, you are missing the point. It's about the loss of local news, sports, and all the other things they have slashed today. I have the NYT and WSJ for national and international news. The Post was the local paper, with good coverage of the business of Washington (the government). Now it is going to just be the business of Washington. I don't need an expensive subscription for that when I can get that elsewhere.
We don't know all the people who were fired today but how many of those Pulitzer winners are still Post reporters? I think you are thinking the Post is the same as what it was a year ago or two years ago. It isn't even close.
More than 300,000 people canceled their subscriptions to the Post after Bezos killed the paper's endorsement of Kamala back in 2024. Those cancellations are what forced the paper to cut coverage of sports and local news and all the rest. Now you're canceling your subscription because it's not covering sports and local news and all the rest. If you and other people do that, that will force even more cuts in their coverage, which will prompt even more people to cancel their subscriptions. This is how newspapers die. Bezos surely deserves lots of blame. But so do all those people who canceled their subscriptions because that's what set off this downward spiral. And what exactly did canceling those subscriptions accomplish? Except for decimating one of the world's great news outlets and forcing the layoffs of many of the best journalists in the country, many of whom will surely now leave the profession?