Is this Streisand effect going on? By not endorsing they got more people engaged then if they had?
I would read what he wrote, but I already canceled my subscription. Alas.
Huh. Weird. Bezos’s face is different from how it used to be. He’s definitely gotten gender affirming surgery (testosterone or some cheek squaring plastic surgery)
He’s going full lex Luther
World’s second most punchable face.
I would say third, after Donald and musk
Ajit Pai will always have the worlds most punchable face.
Donnie’s got Il Duce face, which means it’s more kickable.
It would similarly look better upside down
Lol. It wasn’t the “Washington Post” who decided that. It was the owner.
The number of subscriptions has gone down by 10% already. That’s what happens when billionaires interfere with media, apparently.
People should hit him where it hurts, Amazon.
If there are two parties, and one says it’s raining, and the other says it isn’t, it’s not the news media’s job to give an unbiased report on the debate, it’s their job to look out the fucking window and say whether or not it’s raining.
If literally nobody gives a shit about the endorsement then blocking it is a pointless gesture and not going to increase credibility with anyone by his own admission, Is what I would say if it wasn’t obviously another billionaire oligarch putting his finger on the scale of democracy then saying it isn’t or it’s justified.
Tax your rich assholes America.
Been trying to I promise! Trouble is, the rich assholes took over the asylum
“Democracy dies with billionaires.”
presidential endorsements create the “perception of bias”
You know what else creates a perception of bias? Meeting with Trump right before withholding the Harris endorsement.
Also… bullshit… it’s amazing how many people just get their marching instructions from their preferred newspaper. They don’t even pay attention. They will literally tell canvassers that they will decide who they are voting for based on what the paper says.
They don’t even pay attention. They will literally tell canvassers that they will decide who they are voting for based on what the paper says.
I had a conversation with my dad recently about it. he’s been a life long republican. In any case I had to remind him that I told him in 2016 that Trump was quoting hitler almost-verbatim. The only difference was that a) it was a more or less direct translation into english, and b) ‘jews’ were exchanged for ‘muslims’.
he also kept demanding sources and I’m like ‘the source is trump speaking. trump said that himself. this is a direct quote’. (for example the ‘Dictator on day one’ comment.) same goes for political violence. same goes for everything in the 2025;
like fucking hell, it’s exhausting. I tossed in the source on Fox being a right-wing propaganda rag for good measure.
When a conservative asks you for sources, they do so in bad faith. They don’t care about engaging with reality. It’s a deflection tactic.
They will never even look at the source. It goes beyond simple lack of curiosity, their brain has created a sort of defense mechanism that will prevent them from ever actually comprehending that they could be wrong about something. So they will do everything to avoid being in a situation that could lead to them learning something new.
Because nothing is more important than never being wrong about anything, ever.
Yup. That’s exactly why he’s voting for Harris this time around. All those bad faith arguments.
No, but it took a while to get him off Fox News. He didn’t vote in the 2020 presidential election either (or maybe he voted for some other republican jackass. I forget.)
He grew up thoroughly republican. It’s taken a while to break the brainwashing, but it can be done.
The Washington Post already carries a perception of bias for the Republican party, a Harris endorsement would have potentially balanced that somewhat.
This statement doesn’t even stand up to the flimsiest scrutiny
“if you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice”
-Rush
Smells like an anti-editorial absolutist. Wow so objective. Much truth.
Wtf is wrong with being biased against out and proud fascists.
It’s not even bias… My hatred for fascists is well-founded, thank you very much
So didn’t the crucial reporting of Woodward and Bernstein exposing the Watergate scandal on the pages of the Washington Post show bias against Nixon, Jeff? Would you have stopped that reporting had you owned the paper in 1972?
Yes
Now more than ever the world needs a credible, trusted, independent voice…
I’m not sure he understands the meaning of “independent”.
Or credible
Or trusted.
But he’s nailed “voice” at least though, right?
Fuck you, Jeff.
