Former Congresswoman Liz Cheney recently took aim at Jeff Bezos, the owner of the Washington Post, criticizing the newspaper for its decision not to endorse Vice President Kamala Harris in the upcoming presidential race. During a discussion with New Yorker editor David Remnick at the magazine’s festival, Cheney expressed her belief that the Post’s non-endorsement stems from fear, particularly fear of Donald Trump. She characterized Harris as “the only candidate in the race who’s a stable responsible adult” and suggested that Bezos’s reluctance to endorse her highlights the urgent need to prevent Trump from returning to power. Cheney’s frustration was evident as she elaborated on the necessity of honoring those who have taken brave public stands, revealing her personal response by canceling her subscription to the Washington Post.
The Washington Post’s decision not to endorse any candidate this election cycle is particularly significant because it marks the first time in 36 years that the publication has chosen not to support a presidential contender. The decision has been perceived as a significant setback for Harris, especially given that she has already faced the disappointment of not receiving an endorsement from the Los Angeles Times, a paper from her home state. According to reports, Bezos played a pivotal role in this decision, influenced by the current political climate and shifting voter trends that seem to edge in Trump’s favor. Critics have suggested that this could reflect Bezos’s vested interests due to his numerous government contracts, raising concerns about the objectivity of the editorial board.
The aftermath of the Washington Post’s announcement saw a wave of public backlash. Members of the mainstream media and various factions within the Democratic Party expressed outrage towards the decision, perceiving it as a slight against Harris’s candidacy. In a show of solidarity and discontent, many celebrities opted to cancel their subscriptions to both the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times following the non-endorsement. This collective action among high-profile individuals demonstrates the perceived gravity of the situation and the risks associated with not rallying behind a candidate from the Democratic Party, particularly one as significant as the sitting Vice President.
In a notable reaction to the editorial stance taken by the Washington Post, Robert Kagan, a prominent editor-at-large for the publication, resigned from his position. His departure came swiftly after the announcement of the non-endorsement, hinting at possible internal dissent regarding the newspaper’s editorial decisions. Such a resignation could signify deeper issues within the organization about its direction and leadership, particularly concerning how it navigates its role in a polarized political landscape.
Meanwhile, the media landscape continues to shift as other publications take stances on candidates in the race. The Las Vegas Review-Journal recently endorsed Donald Trump, showcasing the diverse approaches different outlets are taking regarding their political endorsements. The contrasting decisions between the Washington Post and the Review-Journal reflect the varied editorial philosophies and the challenges media organizations face in deciding whom to support in today’s tumultuous political arena.
Overall, Cheney’s criticisms of Bezos and the Washington Post underscore a larger narrative concerning media accountability and selective support within electoral politics. With Biden and Harris facing significant challenges and Trump’s influence looming large, these developments present critical points of discussion regarding what it means for a political candidate to achieve public support—both from voters and influential media outlets. Cheney’s actions and the resultant media responses reveal the stakes involved, suggesting that both the political landscape and the role of the media must evolve in the face of contemporary challenges.