Anonymous wrote:The Washington Post doesn't owe her a platform. She can buy her own printing press.

OK? Does she owe the Washington Post employment? Are you disputing that she has the right to quit if the employment arrangement does not work for her?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you work for a newspaper don’t insult the paper’s owner.

So then. wealthy person can just buy good press for themselves? Why would that be a good thing?

In case you haven’t realized most employees aren’t free to insult their employer without consequences.

My God you people are stupid. We're talking about a free press here. The press needs to be free to speak the truth as they see it and understand it. Freedom of speech means we're allowed to criticize politicians and billionaires. Billionaires buying and controlling the press is a BAD THING and you're too stupid to see that. This kind of stupid is dangerous.

Are stories or any other cartoons ever shot down?

Yes. Have you not been paying attention?

Just report the news

^^ buy WaPo

WaPo is about to announce another round of layoffs or firings. Kara Swisher, a very good former WaPo reporter, is thinking of putting together investors to but WaPo from Bezos. Now that he has damaged it, he might be willing to sell.

I quit the Washington Post too. And pretty much all news media.

Don't give a damn about what trumps up to and don't what to hear anything more about him or the GOP traitors.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you work for a newspaper don’t insult the paper’s owner.

So then. wealthy person can just buy good press for themselves? Why would that be a good thing?

In case you haven’t realized most employees aren’t free to insult their employer without consequences.

My God you people are stupid. We're talking about a free press here. The press needs to be free to speak the truth as they see it and understand it. Freedom of speech means we're allowed to criticize politicians and billionaires. Billionaires buying and controlling the press is a BAD THING and you're too stupid to see that. This kind of stupid is dangerous.

Are stories or any other cartoons ever shot down?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who will hire her knowing she will write cartoons critiquing them?

The Atlantic has been recruiting WashPo journalists.

LOL, so billionaire owners are fine as long as it is the "right" kind of billionaire that agrees with you. At least Bezos actually made his own money.

I have nothing against billionaire owners; I do have something against owners who obstruct a free press, as well as owners of news organizations who contribute to presidential inaugurations.

No, you don't. Kamala Harris has been heavily bankrolled by Laurene Powell Jobs and the Atlantic has been used to try to stifle "free press" on Substack and undermine narratives in the press that don't align with her political ideology. David Geffen hugely bankrolled Obama. Stop trying to act principled about this.

+1000

The Washington Post is Bezo’s newspaper and if he decides tomorrow to run it like Oprah’s magazine and put himself on the cover of every issue he can.

Before Bezo, the Post was owned by a different rich person who decided to use it as a partisan weapon against the other team.

The difference is that the cartoonist (and the poster above) don’t seem to be able to grasp that. Various rich people and businesses have donated to every inauguration. Only if it is a political opponent is it suddenly newsworthy and oh so concerning.

Anonymous wrote:For all those who think political cartoons should be funny, this links to a couple commemorating the 20th anniversary of 9/11: https://www.sbsun.com/2021/09/11/twenty-years-after-9-11-political-cartoons/

Political cartoons are editorial opinions. They aren't supposed to be funny like Garfield.

Then do not mislabel them by calling them cartoons. Maybe “drawn political commentary.”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you work for a newspaper don’t insult the paper’s owner.

So then. wealthy person can just buy good press for themselves? Why would that be a good thing?

In case you haven’t realized most employees aren’t free to insult their employer without consequences.

My God you people are stupid. We're talking about a free press here. The press needs to be free to speak the truth as they see it and understand it. Freedom of speech means we're allowed to criticize politicians and billionaires. Billionaires buying and controlling the press is a BAD THING and you're too stupid to see that. This kind of stupid is dangerous.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who will hire her knowing she will write cartoons critiquing them?

The Atlantic has been recruiting WashPo journalists.

LOL, so billionaire owners are fine as long as it is the "right" kind of billionaire that agrees with you. At least Bezos actually made his own money.

I have nothing against billionaire owners; I do have something against owners who obstruct a free press, as well as owners of news organizations who contribute to presidential inaugurations.

No, you don't. Kamala Harris has been heavily bankrolled by Laurene Powell Jobs and the Atlantic has been used to try to stifle "free press" on Substack and undermine narratives in the press that don't align with her political ideology. David Geffen hugely bankrolled Obama. Stop trying to act principled about this.

Who said I support the Atlantic? I only noted that the Atlantic was recruiting Washington Post reporters. 🤷‍♀️

Who cares? WAPO is a rag and this clown was obviously irrelevant. No one will care tomorrow.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who will hire her knowing she will write cartoons critiquing them?

The Atlantic has been recruiting WashPo journalists.

LOL, so billionaire owners are fine as long as it is the "right" kind of billionaire that agrees with you. At least Bezos actually made his own money.

I have nothing against billionaire owners; I do have something against owners who obstruct a free press, as well as owners of news organizations who contribute to presidential inaugurations.

No, you don't. Kamala Harris has been heavily bankrolled by Laurene Powell Jobs and the Atlantic has been used to try to stifle "free press" on Substack and undermine narratives in the press that don't align with her political ideology. David Geffen hugely bankrolled Obama. Stop trying to act principled about this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who will hire her knowing she will write cartoons critiquing them?

The Atlantic has been recruiting WashPo journalists.

LOL, so billionaire owners are fine as long as it is the "right" kind of billionaire that agrees with you. At least Bezos actually made his own money.

I have nothing against billionaire owners; I do have something against owners who obstruct a free press, as well as owners of news organizations who contribute to presidential inaugurations.

Anonymous wrote:Nail in the free press coffin.

This happened when papers consolidated into a few. So much for antitrust laws.