Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin

(115,646 posts)
Sat Oct 26, 2024, 12:49 PM Oct 26

The Washington Post and LA Times just stepped into a bigger political mess than the one they tried to avoid

When is something a newspaper doesn't publish a news story?

In this case, that's right now. And it's actually two stories: The Washington Post won't be endorsing a presidential candidate this year. The move comes days after the Los Angeles Times made the same decision.

The obvious parallel between the two calls is that both newspapers are owned by very wealthy men. Patrick Soon-Shiong, who owns the Los Angeles Times, is worth a reported $6 billion; Jeff Bezos, who owns the Post, is worth a reported $194 billion, making him the third-richest person in the world.

And there are other similarities between the two non-decisions: The rationale behind the moves, for instance, is being communicated quite clumsily.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/the-washington-post-and-la-times-just-stepped-into-a-bigger-political-mess-than-the-one-they-tried-to-avoid/ar-AA1sWr74

7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The Washington Post and LA Times just stepped into a bigger political mess than the one they tried to avoid (Original Post) Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Oct 26 OP
Are there any newspapers that aren't owned by wealthy people? marybourg Oct 26 #1
I doubt most people can afford to. Customers believe they should be able to read for free online... Hekate Oct 26 #3
All true. Pointless to rail against newspapers owned by wealthy people. marybourg Oct 26 #4
My take is: "We don't want to upset either side of the political enviornment" chouchou Oct 26 #2
nope Skittles Oct 28 #5
With respect to Mr. Joel: You may be right... I may be crazy. chouchou Oct 29 #6
Maybe a coop distribution system? I don't necessarily mind paying for subscription travelingthrulife Oct 29 #7

Hekate

(94,881 posts)
3. I doubt most people can afford to. Customers believe they should be able to read for free online...
Sat Oct 26, 2024, 04:10 PM
Oct 26

That, btw, is an attitude widespread on DU.

My newspapers used to be fat with advertising — which has gone online. Ads paid a lot more than subscriptions.

Local papers have diminished in their perceived importance to local communities. Reporters are fewer. If no one reports what the City Council is up to, is it really happening?

It costs a lot of money to run a business, and newspapers are a business. The building and equipment all cost a lot. If it is a national newspaper, there will be travel costs inside the country and overseas. The owner/editor needs to support his family. Reporters expect to be able to support their families.

The big outfits have gobbled up the small.

Someone this morning opined that WaPo reporters should all quit and start a co-op newspaper. Very funny. See above re expenses.

marybourg

(13,193 posts)
4. All true. Pointless to rail against newspapers owned by wealthy people.
Sat Oct 26, 2024, 04:22 PM
Oct 26

But since the internet, non- wealthy people can have something of a voice also. Witness — “influencers”!

chouchou

(1,338 posts)
2. My take is: "We don't want to upset either side of the political enviornment"
Sat Oct 26, 2024, 01:09 PM
Oct 26

So you're spineless cowards.

My other take is: "Each Candidate has pluses and minuses"

So, you're both 2 God-damn idiots.

Skittles

(159,642 posts)
5. nope
Mon Oct 28, 2024, 10:22 PM
Oct 28

they are either afraid of Trump or complicit with him

has nothing to do with Democrats and everything to do with a threat to democracy

travelingthrulife

(796 posts)
7. Maybe a coop distribution system? I don't necessarily mind paying for subscription
Tue Oct 29, 2024, 03:13 PM
Oct 29

But I don't want to have to manage dozens of subscriptions to read the sources I enjoy. Nor do I want to pay a full subscription when I only read an article or two now and again. Subscriptions have become too time consuming and annoying with all the passwording, etc.
Why not have many national/international/local news sources available for subscription under a single umbrella. WE get to choose to which papers we subscribe. I would even subscribe to local news then.

Like cable programming except we choose and they don't rip us off.

Latest Discussions»Editorials & Other Articles»The Washington Post and L...