The decline in the Washington Post's subscriber count intensified on Tuesday, mere hours after its owner, Jeff Bezos, stood by his choice to cease presidential endorsements in a bid to regain media trust. This move saw the outlet lose 250,000 subscribers, marking a 10% drop from its pre-announcement figures of 2.5 million, as reported by NPR's David Folkenflik. The day before had already seen a loss of 200,000 according to the same source. These figures were derived from the volume of cancellation emails received, shared an insider at the publication; meanwhile, staff access to the subscriber dashboard has been revoked.
Veteran journalist Bob Woodward expressed his disagreement with this strategy on Tuesday, emphasizing that the Washington Post has played a critical role in covering Donald Trump and enjoyed support from its editorial page for such endeavors. Bezos argued that this decision underscores a commitment to bolstering journalistic integrity and trustworthiness - areas where he notes the profession has alarmingly dipped in public esteem. "Our standing has sunk even lower than Congress's. We're now viewed as the least trustworthy profession. Clearly, our current approach is failing," he lamented.
Recent findings by The New York Times highlighted this crisis of confidence: mainstream media now ranks below social media in trust levels, with 55% of survey participants viewing it as detrimental to democracy.
The Washington Post isn't alone in stepping back from presidential endorsements. Gannett’s USA Today and over 200 affiliated local newspapers also declared their abstention from endorsing presidential candidates this election cycle. According to USA Today spokesperson Lark-Marie Antón speaking to Politico, this decision is rooted in a belief that America's future unfolds through local decisions. "Our commitment is to delivering crucial facts and reliable information that empower our readers towards informed electoral choices," she stated.
Despite halting presidential endorsements, these publications maintain they will continue offering recommendations for local and state political offices.
In defending the Post's stance, Bezos articulated that presidential endorsements have negligible influence on election outcomes but significantly contribute to perceived bias and compromise journalistic independence. By discontinuing them, he asserts the paper is making a stand based on principle — one he believes is correct for these turbulent times.
Veteran journalist Bob Woodward expressed his disagreement with this strategy on Tuesday, emphasizing that the Washington Post has played a critical role in covering Donald Trump and enjoyed support from its editorial page for such endeavors. Bezos argued that this decision underscores a commitment to bolstering journalistic integrity and trustworthiness - areas where he notes the profession has alarmingly dipped in public esteem. "Our standing has sunk even lower than Congress's. We're now viewed as the least trustworthy profession. Clearly, our current approach is failing," he lamented.
Recent findings by The New York Times highlighted this crisis of confidence: mainstream media now ranks below social media in trust levels, with 55% of survey participants viewing it as detrimental to democracy.
The Washington Post isn't alone in stepping back from presidential endorsements. Gannett’s USA Today and over 200 affiliated local newspapers also declared their abstention from endorsing presidential candidates this election cycle. According to USA Today spokesperson Lark-Marie Antón speaking to Politico, this decision is rooted in a belief that America's future unfolds through local decisions. "Our commitment is to delivering crucial facts and reliable information that empower our readers towards informed electoral choices," she stated.
Despite halting presidential endorsements, these publications maintain they will continue offering recommendations for local and state political offices.
In defending the Post's stance, Bezos articulated that presidential endorsements have negligible influence on election outcomes but significantly contribute to perceived bias and compromise journalistic independence. By discontinuing them, he asserts the paper is making a stand based on principle — one he believes is correct for these turbulent times.
