I always thought newspapers endorsing candidates was cringe anyway, tbh. I'm sure Bezos' motives were not altruistic, but I feel like people are making a bigger deal out of this than it really is.

[–] nothx@hexbear.net 14 points 1 week ago (1 children)

They definitely are… WaPo could have easily just done and said nothing and no one would have been the wiser, but instead they drew attention to it.

[–] darkcalling@hexbear.net 17 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

No they couldn't have. Several people quit, they cried about Bezos blocking them from endorsing Kamala, other news outlets reported it.

All Bezos could have done in that situation would have been to say nothing but people would absolutely have been the wiser about it being blocked by him and they'd probably lose as many subscriptions as from this. I doubt his statement wins or loses him any meaningful number of subscribers, it's just cover so he doesn't have to come out and say actually he'd rather stay on Trump's good side in case he wins and/or maybe he thinks Trump is better for his interests but of course would prefer associating with someone so uncouth.

[–] nothx@hexbear.net 9 points 1 week ago

You are right, I was trying to agree and say that news media could/should just not endorse. I didn’t articulate that tho.

I agree tho, the cat was out of the bag on this situation when people started quitting over it.