Anonymous wrote:Immediately unsubscribed.

Because you only want to read opinions which align with those you hold? OK.

Anonymous wrote:Their economics expert , Ms Rampell, is an anthropology major from Princeton. Grew up rich, went to Princeton for anthropology, who does that that isn’t rich, and now lives in manhattan in high rise exclusive apartment.

But she understands the US worker.

They have fallen so low.

Just like Trump the billionaire understands the average American worker, right?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Immediately unsubscribed.

Yes me too. I held off when he directed paper to not endorse Kamala as that could be somewhat neutral position. Now it is full on ideological propaganda.

Will also try to shop less at Amazon and Whole Foods..

Try to shop less at Amazon and, wait for it, Whole Foods. That’s rich. As if in this area you can’t find alternatives to Amazon, albeit slower and more expensive in many cases. As if you can’t go to MOM’s Organic Market and similar non-billionaire, pro-worker outlets for products you pick up at Whole Foods.

Like the non-AOC Democrats in Congress, this isn’t really THAT important to you. You’re unsubscribing from the paper which for now is still engaging in legitimate journalism on its news pages. So unsubscribing to the paper undercuts the reporters and editors trying to maintain the news operation. But, y’know, it’s a good sound bite at bbq’s and cocktail parties.

But Amazon and Whole Foods, where Bezos makes so much of money? Well, you’re going to “try” to shop less with them.

Just as our non-AOC Democrats in Congress are going to “try” to advocate for us even though they are in the minority. They will write sternly written letters and posts on Elon Musk’s X platform. They will meet with mere millionaires concerned about the business climate. They will go ahead and cast votes opposing Presidents Trump and Musk, and make speeches on the floor. They will pose long-winded question/speeches in committee hearings that witnesses can easily evade. Why they will even go to the HQ of USAID and politely ask the Musk security goon to let them inside, and then stomp their feet outside for the cameras after said goon smirks at them and tells them no chance.

What’s missing from the non-AOC, non-JohnLewis Democrats is the willingness and courage to make “good trouble”, “necessary trouble”. Oh, yes, on MLK Day we celebrate his Letter from a Birmingham Jail, and the civil rights marchers who persevered through police attack dogs sinking their jaws into them.

Your points above about unsubscribing to the Post and “trying” to patronize Bezos businesses less will work just fine at bbq’s and cocktail parties. You won’t have to encounter the little people suffering job loss and bankruptcy and hunger and homelessness. But if you do, I’m sure your fake-sympathetic platitudes and “thoughts and prayers” will go a long way towards comforting them.

I cancelled my subscription because I don't want the MAGA influences in my brain.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The WaPo was lost when he pulled the Harris endorsement. This was coming.

Get your news elsewhere. The WaPo is going to fold.

Pretty sure WaPo has been losing money for years. Bezos just uses it as an influence tool, like any smart billionaire would. He's seen the shifting political landscape and has now dropped the leftist/woke stuff and getting in line. Not surprising. But don't think that a boycott is going to cause WaPo to change course---the purpose has not been profits for a long time.

He doesn’t care about subscriptions. It’s not a profit making venture. It’s now just his way to suck up to Trump. We need to kick these billionaires out of our important institutions. But how? We can’t even limit their influence in elections.

Meanwhile, over the past five years the NY Times saw its revenue grow from $1.8 billion to $2.4 billion. It is possible for newspapers to make money in this environment. The difference is that the Times is owned by a family committed to journalism. Whereas the Post is owned by a tech billionaire who uses the newspaper to appeal to the whims of other billionaires. The Post as a meaningful paper died years ago.

Anonymous wrote:Can someone help me read between the lines here?
If he wants opinion pieces that are more dedicated to personal freedom wouldn’t that mean he doesn’t like what he’s seeing in trump either?
To me that means if I wrote a piece about Republicans wanting to control women’s bodies and possibly how to get around that that’s personal freedom, right?

He was a VIP guest at Trump’s inauguration, so pretty sure the answer to your first question is no.

On the second, possibly, but the bottom line is that the publisher should not be dictating the guidelines for opinion pieces. At all.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The paper lost $100 million last year. Rather than preaching to the shrinking choir, he is going after the Wall Street Journal.

This was a toy for Bezos. He got bored. He has no plan.

This was not a toy. Billionaires spend money to influence. They buy politicians, media outlets, newspapers , etc. It was clear to me from the very beginning that he bought WaPo as a tool to influence large swaths of people.

A few years ago on DCUM I was basically called uncultured and poorly read for refusing to read the Washington Post after he bought it. I got a good laugh at all the DCUM posters that were outraged after he cut endorsements during the last election. How can anyone believe billionaires are buying media outlets to further the message of the little guy?

I’m so sorry this happened to you. I’m tired of being told what to read/watch/think. If we let people think for themselves, maybe we’d be in a better place. I truly believe the Trump elections have been a backlash to being told how to be ans what to do.

Can someone help me read between the lines here?
If he wants opinion pieces that are more dedicated to personal freedom wouldn’t that mean he doesn’t like what he’s seeing in trump either?
To me that means if I wrote a piece about Republicans wanting to control women’s bodies and possibly how to get around that that’s personal freedom, right?

Anonymous wrote:The WaPo was lost when he pulled the Harris endorsement. This was coming.

Get your news elsewhere. The WaPo is going to fold.

Pretty sure WaPo has been losing money for years. Bezos just uses it as an influence tool, like any smart billionaire would. He's seen the shifting political landscape and has now dropped the leftist/woke stuff and getting in line. Not surprising. But don't think that a boycott is going to cause WaPo to change course---the purpose has not been profits for a long time.

Anonymous wrote:The most devastatingly accurate comment I read:

“WaPo is in its Dan Snyder era.”

Lol, exactly.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The paper lost $100 million last year. Rather than preaching to the shrinking choir, he is going after the Wall Street Journal.

This was a toy for Bezos. He got bored. He has no plan.

This was not a toy. Billionaires spend money to influence. They buy politicians, media outlets, newspapers , etc. It was clear to me from the very beginning that he bought WaPo as a tool to influence large swaths of people.

A few years ago on DCUM I was basically called uncultured and poorly read for refusing to read the Washington Post after he bought it. I got a good laugh at all the DCUM posters that were outraged after he cut endorsements during the last election. How can anyone believe billionaires are buying media outlets to further the message of the little guy?

I wanted to believe him when he promised no editorial interference of WoPo but he has not honored his promises.

Cancelled subscription like everyone else I know.

Anonymous wrote:Immediately unsubscribed.

Yes me too. I held off when he directed paper to not endorse Kamala as that could be somewhat neutral position. Now it is full on ideological propaganda.

Will also try to shop less at Amazon and Whole Foods..

The most devastatingly accurate comment I read:

“WaPo is in its Dan Snyder era.”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The paper lost $100 million last year. Rather than preaching to the shrinking choir, he is going after the Wall Street Journal.

This was a toy for Bezos. He got bored. He has no plan.

This was not a toy. Billionaires spend money to influence. They buy politicians, media outlets, newspapers , etc. It was clear to me from the very beginning that he bought WaPo as a tool to influence large swaths of people.

A few years ago on DCUM I was basically called uncultured and poorly read for refusing to read the Washington Post after he bought it. I got a good laugh at all the DCUM posters that were outraged after he cut endorsements during the last election. How can anyone believe billionaires are buying media outlets to further the message of the little guy?