Anonymous wrote:Chicago Tribune has not endorsed Harris. Neither has Detroit Free Press nor Minnesota Star Tribune.

Four papers out of hundreds. *shrug*

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bezos screwed up.

This is an act of courage by Bezos. He will be lauded the annals of history for this move, even if there are some short term bumps. We need a media for all Americans, not just the coastal elites who are out of touch. This is the type of legacy-defining move that is of interest to a man of his stature, not just a couple extra billions.

More and more of the media has been taken over by conservatives, who run nothing but opinion pieces masquerading as political news, verging onto outright conspiracy theories such as amplifying the "eating the cats and dogs" garbage out there yet you think the top problem with the media is that the Washington Post, like virtually every other newspaper, endorsed candidates? This is some great act of leadership, yet absolutely nobody in conservative media is to be bothered with it?

Chicago Tribune has not endorsed Harris. Neither has Detroit Free Press nor Minnesota Star Tribune.

Anonymous wrote:wow! has there ever been a better indication of the BIAS in MSM than these reactions by WAPO journalists and WAPO readers?

clearly educated elites own WAPO and expect “their” type of reporting.

usually only pro-globalist, pro-immigration, and anti-worker columns.

confirmation of their exceptionalism and brilliance.

And contempt for US working class

Are you even on the same planet as the rest of us? Upthread a poster was calling for the Washington Post to be more objective and hold candidates and political figures to the SAME standard rather than ignoring one side's craziness while overfocusing on every hiccup and sniffle from the other.

And here you walked away with "bias" and "their" type of reporting and "contempt for the US working class?" Your commentary is at a complete disjoint.

Or do you just post your opinionated drivel here without actually bothering to read what other posters are ACTUALLY saying?

Anonymous wrote:Bezos screwed up.

This is an act of courage by Bezos. He will be lauded the annals of history for this move, even if there are some short term bumps. We need a media for all Americans, not just the coastal elites who are out of touch. This is the type of legacy-defining move that is of interest to a man of his stature, not just a couple extra billions.

wow! has there ever been a better indication of the BIAS in MSM than these reactions by WAPO journalists and WAPO readers?

clearly educated elites own WAPO and expect “their” type of reporting.

usually only pro-globalist, pro-immigration, and anti-worker columns.

confirmation of their exceptionalism and brilliance.

And contempt for US working class

Bezos screwed up.

Anonymous wrote:

If the Washington Post wants to be a valuable institution then it needs to step the f&ck up and start doing more objective reporting, needs to stop sanewashing Trump's incoherent dementia rambling and his weird 39 minutes of awkwardly wobbling around on a stage rather than do the Q&A Town Hall that he promised, needs to hold EVERYONE up to a consistent standard, because they keep giving Trump a pass with every crazy thing he does, whereas they ran above-the-fold shout-it-from-the-rooftops headlines about Biden's poor debate performance for 25 straight days. Yet Trump shows up looking senile and rambling incoherently night after night after night and maybe if we're lucky there will be one single, tiny mention of it buried on page 7. Same with the shit they did to Clinton with "Butter Emails!" day after day after day when it was a big fat nothingburger designed to falsely stir things up and sink her campaign. They fell for it hook, line and sinker.

DO BETTER, Washington Post. You need to EARN your subscribers back.

Anonymous wrote:Tech robber barons Bezos, Musk, Google guys, Tim Cook, and Zuckerberg obviously have access to data and A.I. tools to synthesize said data and can predict elections before we vote. Bezos cozying up to Trump is a telegraphing he believes he'll win. If Trump is about to get smoked, Bezos isn't going to meddle in some completely meaningless Wapo endorsement. Bezos is flirting with Trump with this stunt. Why? Because the oligarchs see he's going to win.

They don’t mind telegraphing that message, but it does not follow that it’s true, or that their actions reveal anything we don’t know. Suppose this secret data says a trump win is a low probability event, it’s still a good bet.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tech robber barons Bezos, Musk, Google guys, Tim Cook, and Zuckerberg obviously have access to data and A.I. tools to synthesize said data and can predict elections before we vote. Bezos cozying up to Trump is a telegraphing he believes he'll win. If Trump is about to get smoked, Bezos isn't going to meddle in some completely meaningless Wapo endorsement. Bezos is flirting with Trump with this stunt. Why? Because the oligarchs see he's going to win.

No, AI cannot predict the election. It might in the future, but not in 2024. The tech bros are just going with the data we have, which is that Harris and Trump are 50-50. THEREFORE... some are hedging their bets. The right thing to do would have been to push hard to Harris in the first place, as some billionaires did. But Bezos probably doesn't like Harris (and obviously hates Trump, like everyone does) and he didn't want to get involved at first. So he was cornered and now he's in a lose-lose situation, all of his own making. He deserves the stress.

You're naive and coping.

Anonymous wrote:Tech robber barons Bezos, Musk, Google guys, Tim Cook, and Zuckerberg obviously have access to data and A.I. tools to synthesize said data and can predict elections before we vote. Bezos cozying up to Trump is a telegraphing he believes he'll win. If Trump is about to get smoked, Bezos isn't going to meddle in some completely meaningless Wapo endorsement. Bezos is flirting with Trump with this stunt. Why? Because the oligarchs see he's going to win.

No, AI cannot predict the election. It might in the future, but not in 2024. The tech bros are just going with the data we have, which is that Harris and Trump are 50-50. THEREFORE... some are hedging their bets. The right thing to do would have been to push hard to Harris in the first place, as some billionaires did. But Bezos probably doesn't like Harris (and obviously hates Trump, like everyone does) and he didn't want to get involved at first. So he was cornered and now he's in a lose-lose situation, all of his own making. He deserves the stress.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Per NPR story today, over 200K cancellations and growing.

And Bezos won’t give in and instead is going to hire more ideologically diverse staff.

Ha ha. "Ideologically diverse".

Translation: people who will print right-wing lies.

Good Lord this country is going straight to hell in Trump's handbasket.

Tech robber barons Bezos, Musk, Google guys, Tim Cook, and Zuckerberg obviously have access to data and A.I. tools to synthesize said data and can predict elections before we vote. Bezos cozying up to Trump is a telegraphing he believes he'll win. If Trump is about to get smoked, Bezos isn't going to meddle in some completely meaningless Wapo endorsement. Bezos is flirting with Trump with this stunt. Why? Because the oligarchs see he's going to win.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Haven't read these pages but what's the matter with the WaPo not endorsing either Kamala or Trump?

Do we want a democracy, or do we want something else?

The media is supposed to be neutral. They're supposed to report the news, and not massage information to fit their bias.

No unbiased media, no democracy.

I thought a lot of you were highly intelligent, from the best schools in the world. So act like it and use the critical thinking skills they taught you at your Ivy Leagues.

We CANNOT afford to have the media telling us what to believe. That's the kiss of death for our democratic ideals.

Of course we want democracy. And the free speech that goes with it. What we don’t want is for an independent editorial decision to be reversed because the “boss” is afraid his financial interests will be harmed. That’s not free speech.

And I’m sure you understand that perfectly well.

A private citizen stopping a publication in his private business is in no way a violation of free speech.

How do you not understand that?

At first it looked like fear of retribution. Now we know it was quid pro quo. The boss made the decision to curry favor with a man who today claims he wants to be a dictator and who, by all measures, is a fascist. How do you not understand that?

What should terrify the partisans, and maybe it does subconsciously, is that Bezos and other movers-and-shakers don't think Kamala is the strong horse. They wouldn't be making these deals if the election was in the bag.

They are doing this because they expect her to lose.

No, they are hedging their bets. The Dems follow the rule of law. Trump has already pulled on contract from bezos for political reasons instead of following contracting law. He knows Harris wouldn't do that, where Trump would (and has.)