Back in the day, the Post also employed a fellow named Jack Anderson.
Ordinary people who worked for the government could contact Jack Anderson and tell him if his/her government boss was embezzling, cheating the government, or whatever.
All the regular workers knew Jack Anderson was on their side and would protect them.
Or, maybe. Bezos is hedging his bets against Trump winning with his rival (SpaceX) Elon Musk already in a cozy relationship with Trump while Bezos' space company Blue Origin will be very dependent on government contracts to take off.
Yes, like the betting and stock markets and other CEOs, Bezos is factoring in the strong possibility (dare I say probability) of a Trump-Musk-RFK victory next week, which is the good news here. If a “Nazi”-like “Revenge Presidency” is about the purge the nation of “the Enemy Within,” it’s time to turn quisling.
This is so grievous. I have a strong gut feeling this is the way it is with most if not all large city newspapers as well as it being embedded in all broadcast news/the big 3 and all cable "news" outlets and commentary shows, except for FOX News.
Bezos and other shrewd businessmen probably see Trump as the likely winner next week. They want to appear less hostile to the new administration. That’s a shrewd business move, not something to whine about. Liberal Democrats need to get a helmet.
Elon Musk, X, and Jeff Bezos, Washington Post, both have common denominators of space industries that are reliant on government contracts. Anyone else see a problem with that?
I think it's a legitimate concern -- and it's on both the right and the left. Look at the government connections enjoyed by Mark Zuckerberg, who is a big Dem donor.
But in today's world, if you exclude from public service everyone who is connected to a business that does some work for or with the government, you don't have many high level people left for high level positions. I think the way to handle it is to put their potential conflicts under a microscope each and every time.
I can definitely see the value in not endorsing candidates, but in this case, the time seems very suspicious, given that they've been endorsing for almost 1/2 a century. Bezos should have either made this policy a year ago or waited until after the election. The timing on this stinks says a lot.
There's zero evidence that Bezos' decision was under pressure from Trump (how much pressure can you really exert on a guy worth $200 billion?) and Bezos himself says Trump had nothing to do with it. Anything to the contrary is utter speculation, and contrary to what facts we have.
But lets assume -- against the evidence -- that Bezos' decision WAS under pressure from Trump. Does doing the right, ethical and honorable thing become unacceptable merely because Trump advocates it for his own political purposes? If so, that strikes me as TDS in the extreme -- good actions become bad if Trump urges them.
I think that sort of "reasoning" was behind many of the mistaken Biden administration actions -- from trying to reinstate the Iran deal to opening the Mexican border. The thinking went no further than, "We need to undo anything Trump did." Now we see the results.
If a child were drowning in a swimming pool, and Trump shouted, "Look! Help her!" would it be a bad thing if someone jumped in to save the child -- because it was Trump who asked him to? That's the sort of thing TDS has done to the left.
Newspapers have traditionally been nothing much more than a vehicle for plutocrat owners like Hearst and do-gooder "reporters" like Upton Sinclair, Lincoln Steffens, Ida Tarbell, Henry Demarest Lloyd and Edwin Markham to name but a few, to express their personal opinions disguised as "news." Certainly, the smaller papers that serviced the information needs of America's hinterlands contained helpful information, such as the daily weather report and forecast, commodity prices for the farmers who composed the majority of readers (as well as the population in general), birth announcements and obituaries to keep track of one's neighbors as well as a smattering of national and foreign developments. But the large circulation, urban dailies were always purveyors of propaganda for their favored causes, political parties and candidates and such other assorted social justice crusades as caught their fancy. Things are not really different today, except whereas one could simply ignore the contents of a "newspaper" by simply not purchasing or reading it, we are in an all-enveloping "news and entertainment" environment that pervades every aspect of most people's lives, unless they take special pains to insulate themselves from the miasmatic ooze surrounding them. However, I must admit that there is now a much more disturbing aspect to this, due to the left's success at making "the personal political." Thus, whereas neighbors could once vote in favor of opposing candidates with the assurance that nothing would really change, we now have the situation where one's political position determines one's social standing. Support for the "wrong" candidate can result in stigmatization, loss of respect and even loss of one's employment. Thus the stakes have been raised in the game of life. The corporate media uses this, as well as is used by it, to stoke the animosity and ratchet up the hatred so as to garner more of an audience and thereby increase revenue. I came of age at a time when it suddenly became rather chic and trendy to become a "journalist," in emulation of the fancy people like Woodward and Bernstein who were lionized by the elites for having driven the hated Richard Nixon from public office and shamed him, and by virtue of their support for him, shamed the unwashed masses of Americans who put him into the presidency by a nearly unanimous vote in 1972. The elites could not abide that, so they set about framing him up for a defenestration by the only other means available, viz., the "reporters" who, just as now, were used like a weapon to manipulate public opinion and force his resignation. So today, we still have the elites, using the "media" and its propaganda spewing "reporters" to attempt a similar defenestration of Trump. It's not that those who are running the show began to despise the rest of us just now; they have always done so. It is gratifying, nonetheless, to know that their hatred is now on full display, so the rest of us can take steps to oppose the tyranny they wish to impose on us, using Trump as our weapon. It's payback time, America, so make sure you join in the party and vote to Make America Great Again, and by doing so, sticking your thumb into the eye of the globalist cabal and all their lickspittles in the "media" and the administrative (deep) state who think they rule over us. Go, Trump! Go, America!
Excellent reflection not only on the merits of the decision to refrain from endorsements in the presidential contest, but also on the state of journalism today.
WaPo, NYT, LAT, and the rest of their ilk are nothing more than leftist propaganda organs, like Mother Jones or the Jacobin; but these MSM outlets still falsely (or delusionally) maintain that they are neutral, objective, and unbiased.
The MSM WaPo, and other newspapers like it, serve as leftwing echo chambers. But whenever there might be one stray independent thought pinged within these chambers, the outraged leftwing subscribers cancel and the staff quit from their very own leftist organ. This all sets these publications into a doom loop. For instance, just recently the LAT slashed 20% of its staff … as that publication now swirls around the drain.
Even these newspapers’ owners, engaged in free market capitalism enterprises, eventually realize that even their far left publications cannot defy the laws of supply and demand. But their decades and decades of Democrat and progressive advocacy and propaganda have painted them into a leftwing corner in which they are now trapped.
A few decades ago, this basketball legend presciently stated …
Just goes to show how many WashPo subscribers expect their newspaper to advocate for the Democrats.
If WaPo used the truth to advocate, I think it would be almost acceptable.
Interesting concept.
Back in the day, the Post also employed a fellow named Jack Anderson.
Ordinary people who worked for the government could contact Jack Anderson and tell him if his/her government boss was embezzling, cheating the government, or whatever.
All the regular workers knew Jack Anderson was on their side and would protect them.
Jack would not run a story without verification.
America misses him.
Until I watch a Netflix documentary on this Anderson fellow, I can't believe it.
ha ha, funny! All hail Netflix!
[Future] WaPo Headline:
Earth to be Disintegrated Tomorrow by a Meteor the Size of New Zealand – Minorities, Women, and the Poor To Be Affected Most.
(We know, we should have told you when we found out last year. Our bad.)
huh?
Or, maybe. Bezos is hedging his bets against Trump winning with his rival (SpaceX) Elon Musk already in a cozy relationship with Trump while Bezos' space company Blue Origin will be very dependent on government contracts to take off.
Yes, like the betting and stock markets and other CEOs, Bezos is factoring in the strong possibility (dare I say probability) of a Trump-Musk-RFK victory next week, which is the good news here. If a “Nazi”-like “Revenge Presidency” is about the purge the nation of “the Enemy Within,” it’s time to turn quisling.
“about TO purge”
Heck: I just want Paul Pelosi's stock purchasing guru!
This is so grievous. I have a strong gut feeling this is the way it is with most if not all large city newspapers as well as it being embedded in all broadcast news/the big 3 and all cable "news" outlets and commentary shows, except for FOX News.
Just sourcing the typical liberal propagandist/ journalist.
Always picking the victims in any tragedy with no regard to the majority.
Happy Halloween!
Bezos and other shrewd businessmen probably see Trump as the likely winner next week. They want to appear less hostile to the new administration. That’s a shrewd business move, not something to whine about. Liberal Democrats need to get a helmet.
Elon Musk, X, and Jeff Bezos, Washington Post, both have common denominators of space industries that are reliant on government contracts. Anyone else see a problem with that?
I think it's a legitimate concern -- and it's on both the right and the left. Look at the government connections enjoyed by Mark Zuckerberg, who is a big Dem donor.
But in today's world, if you exclude from public service everyone who is connected to a business that does some work for or with the government, you don't have many high level people left for high level positions. I think the way to handle it is to put their potential conflicts under a microscope each and every time.
I can definitely see the value in not endorsing candidates, but in this case, the time seems very suspicious, given that they've been endorsing for almost 1/2 a century. Bezos should have either made this policy a year ago or waited until after the election. The timing on this stinks says a lot.
There's zero evidence that Bezos' decision was under pressure from Trump (how much pressure can you really exert on a guy worth $200 billion?) and Bezos himself says Trump had nothing to do with it. Anything to the contrary is utter speculation, and contrary to what facts we have.
But lets assume -- against the evidence -- that Bezos' decision WAS under pressure from Trump. Does doing the right, ethical and honorable thing become unacceptable merely because Trump advocates it for his own political purposes? If so, that strikes me as TDS in the extreme -- good actions become bad if Trump urges them.
I think that sort of "reasoning" was behind many of the mistaken Biden administration actions -- from trying to reinstate the Iran deal to opening the Mexican border. The thinking went no further than, "We need to undo anything Trump did." Now we see the results.
If a child were drowning in a swimming pool, and Trump shouted, "Look! Help her!" would it be a bad thing if someone jumped in to save the child -- because it was Trump who asked him to? That's the sort of thing TDS has done to the left.
Newspapers have traditionally been nothing much more than a vehicle for plutocrat owners like Hearst and do-gooder "reporters" like Upton Sinclair, Lincoln Steffens, Ida Tarbell, Henry Demarest Lloyd and Edwin Markham to name but a few, to express their personal opinions disguised as "news." Certainly, the smaller papers that serviced the information needs of America's hinterlands contained helpful information, such as the daily weather report and forecast, commodity prices for the farmers who composed the majority of readers (as well as the population in general), birth announcements and obituaries to keep track of one's neighbors as well as a smattering of national and foreign developments. But the large circulation, urban dailies were always purveyors of propaganda for their favored causes, political parties and candidates and such other assorted social justice crusades as caught their fancy. Things are not really different today, except whereas one could simply ignore the contents of a "newspaper" by simply not purchasing or reading it, we are in an all-enveloping "news and entertainment" environment that pervades every aspect of most people's lives, unless they take special pains to insulate themselves from the miasmatic ooze surrounding them. However, I must admit that there is now a much more disturbing aspect to this, due to the left's success at making "the personal political." Thus, whereas neighbors could once vote in favor of opposing candidates with the assurance that nothing would really change, we now have the situation where one's political position determines one's social standing. Support for the "wrong" candidate can result in stigmatization, loss of respect and even loss of one's employment. Thus the stakes have been raised in the game of life. The corporate media uses this, as well as is used by it, to stoke the animosity and ratchet up the hatred so as to garner more of an audience and thereby increase revenue. I came of age at a time when it suddenly became rather chic and trendy to become a "journalist," in emulation of the fancy people like Woodward and Bernstein who were lionized by the elites for having driven the hated Richard Nixon from public office and shamed him, and by virtue of their support for him, shamed the unwashed masses of Americans who put him into the presidency by a nearly unanimous vote in 1972. The elites could not abide that, so they set about framing him up for a defenestration by the only other means available, viz., the "reporters" who, just as now, were used like a weapon to manipulate public opinion and force his resignation. So today, we still have the elites, using the "media" and its propaganda spewing "reporters" to attempt a similar defenestration of Trump. It's not that those who are running the show began to despise the rest of us just now; they have always done so. It is gratifying, nonetheless, to know that their hatred is now on full display, so the rest of us can take steps to oppose the tyranny they wish to impose on us, using Trump as our weapon. It's payback time, America, so make sure you join in the party and vote to Make America Great Again, and by doing so, sticking your thumb into the eye of the globalist cabal and all their lickspittles in the "media" and the administrative (deep) state who think they rule over us. Go, Trump! Go, America!
Excellent reflection not only on the merits of the decision to refrain from endorsements in the presidential contest, but also on the state of journalism today.
Most salient point: What's the point of endorsing a candidate if everyone already knows who you are going to endorse and why?
Kudos to Bezos for realizing this, and perhaps making the WaPo relevant again before "democracy dies in darkness".
WaPo, NYT, LAT, and the rest of their ilk are nothing more than leftist propaganda organs, like Mother Jones or the Jacobin; but these MSM outlets still falsely (or delusionally) maintain that they are neutral, objective, and unbiased.
References:
https://www.motherjones.com/
https://jacobin.com/
The MSM WaPo, and other newspapers like it, serve as leftwing echo chambers. But whenever there might be one stray independent thought pinged within these chambers, the outraged leftwing subscribers cancel and the staff quit from their very own leftist organ. This all sets these publications into a doom loop. For instance, just recently the LAT slashed 20% of its staff … as that publication now swirls around the drain.
See: https://apnews.com/article/los-angeles-times-layoff-notices-cb02a2f28c2794f096a3e416f3cad71b
Even these newspapers’ owners, engaged in free market capitalism enterprises, eventually realize that even their far left publications cannot defy the laws of supply and demand. But their decades and decades of Democrat and progressive advocacy and propaganda have painted them into a leftwing corner in which they are now trapped.
A few decades ago, this basketball legend presciently stated …
“Republicans buy sneakers, too.”
— Michael Jordan
Source: https://www.azquotes.com/quote/644554
That’s some real keen insight from a “jock.” G’day.
My friend Glenn, not only are you observant of who comments on your posts, but you are also very analytical about those posts and may o
our Holy God acknowledge your devotion.
Amen.