Anonymous wrote:I think it’s hilarious that the Post lost 77 million dollars last year and the employees are butt hurt and in denial that they need some sort of market correction.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

NYT is also SJW newspaper at this point so it won’t be better.

Huh? The NYT is the newspaper of record in the United States. There's no better publication.

Pro-tip: Failing to parrot your biases doesn't make the paper "SJW."

Besides, facts have a well-known liberal bias.

This is exactly why the NYT sucks now because of arrogant people like you. Democrats are not much better at following evidence and facts and in comparison to Republicans. Most people only accept the “facts” when it is consistent with their underlying beliefs and very few people objectively evaluate things anymore. Almost everyone lives in an internet rabbit hole at this point and social media algorithms are reinforcing this ridiculous partisanship where everyone is increasingly disconnected from reality.

Evidence? Please compare the two.

Also, remember the HUGE S storm WaPo tried to drum up over the Catholic school boy incident in DC? WaPo ran the story before it had the facts because it for the leftist narrative that a white straight male did something bad against an oppressed minotory. Oopsie, we only found out later that the school boy didn't do anything wrong and that other groups were antagonizing him first after the full video of the incident got released. It was a huge egg on the face of the paper. The Dem reader base disregarded all facts and ate that story up like red meat because it was an opium hit for the oppression addiction.

So Ds thought the little prick instigated the stand off but that turned out to be not true. Ok.

Now please share all of the way that Rs failed to follow “evidence and facts”.

So we can get our unbiased, nonpartisan comparison.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

There are so many idiots that think WSJ is some sort of far right publication.. lol, it is a business news source. Of course they'll be slightly more conservative, but they're not far right...you don't have to read their OPINION peices of you don't want to.

The WSJ does some of the most fantastic investigative journalism out there. I was absolutely enthralled with their investigations into the Malaysian 1 MDB scandal. In fact, the WSJ journalist doing that story really struck a nerve because he was getting death threats while abroad. It's a fantastic news source despite what all these echo chamber clowns in the DMV say.

+1

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

Anonymous wrote:Gross. WSJ is diabolical.

Anonymous wrote:Can't speak for all of us WaPo employees, but I'm not happy....

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
What’s ironic is that it was a Black woman that had to clean up the mess at the local WAMU affiliate and they complained all the same and even tried to leak damaging stories about her to ruin her reputation. The local journalists were less respectful of her than how they are now with the white male Post management team.

Yeah, firing half the WAMU newsroom in a "pivot to audio" is "cleaning up the mess." Thanks for the laugh.

Thanks for proving my point both in the viciousness and ridiculousness. The fact that you criticize a radio station deciding “pivot to audio” is all that needs to be said.

It seems like the only reason why you want the Post to hire diversity in management is because it looks like you’re more comfortable attacking them.

The Post's newsroom seems perfectly comfortable attacking its current management: https://www.washingtonpost.com/style/media/2024/06/06/post-publisher-draws-more-scrutiny-after-newsroom-shakeup/

How pompous and out of touch can staff be to think their internal company politics should be front page news.

The New York Times sent push alerts on stories about the Post's internal company politics on two consecutive days this week (so far), I don't think it's crazy for the Post to also write about it. Especially since the stories dealt with the publisher trying to get the paper not to write about him.

You’re just proving that journalism is a broken profession.

If the Post’s internal mess isn’t of any public interest, why is there a long discussion of it still going on here? Seems like people are curious about it.

Anonymous wrote:WaPo and NYT still heavily supporting Biden. WSJ recently did a very balanced article on the mental acuity of Biden, and to a lesser extent, Trump. Very thought provoking article. Crickets from the NYT and WaPo recently, which is surprising given that so many Americans are worried about the mental fitness of both candidates. Nothing has changed at either paper since 2016.

Maybe the paper could do an article about how to gauge cognitive function in older adults or that presidential candidates over age 70 need to complete neuropsychological testing. Something to address this important issue before the election. But WaPo won't because it might give Trump an edge, facts be damned!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
What’s ironic is that it was a Black woman that had to clean up the mess at the local WAMU affiliate and they complained all the same and even tried to leak damaging stories about her to ruin her reputation. The local journalists were less respectful of her than how they are now with the white male Post management team.

Yeah, firing half the WAMU newsroom in a "pivot to audio" is "cleaning up the mess." Thanks for the laugh.

Thanks for proving my point both in the viciousness and ridiculousness. The fact that you criticize a radio station deciding “pivot to audio” is all that needs to be said.

It seems like the only reason why you want the Post to hire diversity in management is because it looks like you’re more comfortable attacking them.

The Post's newsroom seems perfectly comfortable attacking its current management: https://www.washingtonpost.com/style/media/2024/06/06/post-publisher-draws-more-scrutiny-after-newsroom-shakeup/

How pompous and out of touch can staff be to think their internal company politics should be front page news.

The New York Times sent push alerts on stories about the Post's internal company politics on two consecutive days this week (so far), I don't think it's crazy for the Post to also write about it. Especially since the stories dealt with the publisher trying to get the paper not to write about him.

You’re just proving that journalism is a broken profession.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
What’s ironic is that it was a Black woman that had to clean up the mess at the local WAMU affiliate and they complained all the same and even tried to leak damaging stories about her to ruin her reputation. The local journalists were less respectful of her than how they are now with the white male Post management team.

Yeah, firing half the WAMU newsroom in a "pivot to audio" is "cleaning up the mess." Thanks for the laugh.

Thanks for proving my point both in the viciousness and ridiculousness. The fact that you criticize a radio station deciding “pivot to audio” is all that needs to be said.

It seems like the only reason why you want the Post to hire diversity in management is because it looks like you’re more comfortable attacking them.

The Post's newsroom seems perfectly comfortable attacking its current management: https://www.washingtonpost.com/style/media/2024/06/06/post-publisher-draws-more-scrutiny-after-newsroom-shakeup/

How pompous and out of touch can staff be to think their internal company politics should be front page news.

The New York Times sent push alerts on stories about the Post's internal company politics on two consecutive days this week (so far), I don't think it's crazy for the Post to also write about it. Especially since the stories dealt with the publisher trying to get the paper not to write about him.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
What’s ironic is that it was a Black woman that had to clean up the mess at the local WAMU affiliate and they complained all the same and even tried to leak damaging stories about her to ruin her reputation. The local journalists were less respectful of her than how they are now with the white male Post management team.

Yeah, firing half the WAMU newsroom in a "pivot to audio" is "cleaning up the mess." Thanks for the laugh.

Thanks for proving my point both in the viciousness and ridiculousness. The fact that you criticize a radio station deciding “pivot to audio” is all that needs to be said.

It seems like the only reason why you want the Post to hire diversity in management is because it looks like you’re more comfortable attacking them.

The Post's newsroom seems perfectly comfortable attacking its current management: https://www.washingtonpost.com/style/media/2024/06/06/post-publisher-draws-more-scrutiny-after-newsroom-shakeup/

How pompous and out of touch can staff be to think their internal company politics should be front page news.