How is not endorsing a candidate “antithetical to independent journalism”? I understand that Bezos stepped in to perhaps overrule an endorsement but in what sense is maintaining neutrality antithetical to independent journalism?
I didn't say not endorsing a candidate is antithetical to independent journalism. I said the way this decision was made was completely antithetical to independent journalism, i.e. the decision not to endorse was not made by journalists independently. Rather the opposite - the journalists' decision was overruled.
How is endorsing a candidate journalism? Sure journalists will have opinions on candidates, but that's not journalism. From what I've read this is from the opinion section of the paper, so it's not journalism in the classic sense anyway.
Independent journalism isn't "whatever journalists want". It means unbiased. Endorsing candidates is by definition biased. They were corrected in their ways because the editorial board became too biased.
they changed the policy of endorsing a candidate by fiat from above at the last minute before one of the most important elections in American history... do we really need to spell out for you how this isn't about endorsement but about how the decision played out?
That reputation is more or less fabricated in order to shield the right from genuine critic. WP is not very left-leaning, I would consider them center. It's just that in the past 8 or so years the right has gotten much more radical, so it doesn't always seem that way.
My take is that WaPo has been exceptionally gentle with Trump, not at all holding him to the same standards they held Biden and Harris. From headline framing, to article vocabulary, to count of articles, fact checking, to associated photos, they've treated Trump quite hospitably.
