Oh, I can already find her on Facebook and Bluesky; she has accounts and posts in both places, but there are certain regulars among the commenters whose posts I’ll miss.
I haven’t missed it, but if I had to give up the NYT as well that would be complicated.
Reading this thread one would think that the Washington post was a print version of Fox News. Yes it is disappointing that a paper that was once among the greats of journalism has fallen under the thumb of an owner who is exterting pressure to both-siderize is stances, but it does still have value and isn’t in the tank for Trump.
As a random example of today’s headlines we have
Trump administration fires thousands for ‘performance’ without evidence, in messy rush
Soldiers are arriving at the border — but hardly any migrants are crossing
It gave a “thumbs up” to all but four of Trump’s Cabinet appointees (something it has never done, by the way, to any prior president). Maybe two or three of those candidates were even sufficiently experienced for their nominated roles, and exactly none of them deserved confirmations after their Senate hearings, even Marco Rubio (who is totally being set up to take a fall for the sin of being someone who should have known better but fell into a trap of his own ambition).
Fuck the Post and all who are still trying to bolster up its deservedly compromised reputation. That they are allowed to publish the occasionally critical story (for now) isn’t a sign of journalistic independence but just giving it more rope to hang its remaining true editorial staff. It will end up being the unflinching mouthpiece for the Trump regime and likely whatever follows it.
Stranger
I really wish any time he’s spoken about it would be “Little Marco Rubio”, just to rub it in.
I’m pretty sure he’s going to get rubbed raw before his time is over. He’s one of the many turncoats into Trumpism who is going to learn too late that this loyalty only goes one way. I mean, fuck that guy, because he’s always been a little asshole, but also he’s definitely going to get his due.
Stranger
Well, lessee here, what are the safeguards against an executive branch gone completely mad, completely out of control, and descending into outright tyranny?
-
The media. This has always been a weak point in the American political system, but what can you expect when media is just a business and has increasingly become dominated by a self-serving plutocracy. It has now reached its conclusion. Behold the results.
-
Congress. Well, forget that. They’re completely in the thrall of Trumpism.
-
The Supreme Court. Would that be the one that recently declared that Trump could do whatever the fuck he wanted and it would be perfectly legal? Yep, pretty sure that’s the one. Soon they’ll be ruling on the validity of lower courts blocking many of Trump’s illegal actions. Don’t hold your breath expecting them to uphold justice or the principles of the Constitution.
The Washington Post sez: “democracy dies in darkness”. I just looked out the window, and it’s pretty fucking dark out there right now.
The problem for me is that at this point I don’t trust them. Yes, they’re still printing some anti-Trump stuff. But what are they not printing that I don’t know about, and how long will they keep printing anything critical? I know they’re censoring some stuff for political reasons – how do I know where they’re drawing the line now, let alone where they’ll decide to draw it tomorrow?
I haven’t cancelled my subscription (which is at the absolute bargain-basement rate you can get if you determinely tell them you can’t afford any more), but I expect I’ll let it lapse when it runs out. And this time, instead of telling them I can’t afford the automatic bump in rate, I’ll be telling them that I don’t trust them any longer.
I hope NPR can keep going.
President Trump’s new head of the Federal Communications Commission has ordered an investigation of NPR and PBS, with an eye toward unraveling federal funding for all public broadcasting.
Stranger
Oh yeah, I’ve been watching that.
A lot of their funding is already not Federal. Maybe they can keep it up even if the MAGA’s cut the federal portion entirely. At least for the time being I can hope.
Less than 1% is directly federal, but it’s estimated that almost 10% comes indirectly from governmental sources.
Presently, NPR receives funding for less than 1% of its budget directly from the federal government, but receives almost 10% of its budget from federal, state, and local governments indirectly.
This article talks about how that works.
I find the info about how and why that money gets to NPR to be interesting, but the article itself (which to be fair is an opinion piece) gives the misleading impression that it’s a very significant amount (much more than 10%).
I understand I wouldn’t trust them as my only source of news, and I’d view anything (particularly endorsements) published by the editorial board with a giant cup of salt, but they do still have some good op-eds and so far what appears to be good regular reporting on the stories they do cover, even if they use “said without evidence” as opposed to the more accurate “lied”.
The problem is if you don’t trust the editorial board, you can’t trust the reporting to be complete or unmolested. One of the things that held the Washington Post above all major newspapers (even, or perhaps especially, the New York Times) was an avowed dedication to editorial independence; that is, that the editor and the board had a final saw regardless of whether the publisher liked it or not. This is no longer the case, not only because of the pullback on the board’s decision to endorse Kamala Harris but because there have been numerous instances of stories being modified or pulled as well as the infamous spiking of Ann Telnaes’ editorial cartoon and their open endorsements of most of Trump’s cabinet picks, something never done for any prior presidential administration. (To be clear, they’ve previously published the prospective nominees and information about them but never provided a “thumbs up/down” rating, which was particularly risible as several had basically one sentence descriptions of their obviously inadequate experience and background.)
I’d previously argued for continuing a subscription to the Washington Post because it is still supporting good journalism and its a money-loser for Jeff Bezos anyway, but given recent developments I can’t assert that it will provide materially unbiased reporting or good faith fact checking. It is basically Bezos’ old school version of Facebook in which he can ‘alter the algorithm’ of reporting as he sees fit.
If you want op-eds, Substack is full of them by people who don’t have to bend to the will of any billionaire overloads or toady up to this administration for access.
Stranger
Last week I gave a very generous (IMO) donation to one of my local NPR stations; we’re already sustaining members of both. I would encourage anyone who can to do likewise.
NPR isn’t perfect, but Morning Edition and All Things Considered are the best broadcast news programs I know. They are important, in a world where the alternatives are CNN and it’s “The whole world in 200 words” journalism.
Yes, that was a decision that HAD to be based on 'how can we make commenting more unpleasant and inconvenient?" I mean, how else could it be explained?
Yeah, that.
Once you know the fix has been in, it’s tough to believe it won’t be in, again.
I give $15 a month to my local station as a subscription because what they do is important.
From the horse’s mouth:
I shared this note with the Washington Post team this morning:
I’m writing to let you know about a change coming to our opinion pages.
We are going to be writing every day in support and defense of two pillars: personal liberties and free markets. We’ll cover other topics too of course, but viewpoints opposing those pillars will be left to be published by others.
There was a time when a newspaper, especially one that was a local monopoly, might have seen it as a service to bring to the reader’s doorstep every morning a broad-based opinion section that sought to cover all views. Today, the internet does that job.
I am of America and for America, and proud to be so. Our country did not get here by being typical. And a big part of America’s success has been freedom in the economic realm and everywhere else. Freedom is ethical — it minimizes coercion — and practical — it drives creativity, invention, and prosperity.
I offered David Shipley, whom I greatly admire, the opportunity to lead this new chapter. I suggested to him that if the answer wasn’t “hell yes,” then it had to be “no.” After careful consideration, David decided to step away. This is a significant shift, it won’t be easy, and it will require 100% commitment — I respect his decision. We’ll be searching for a new Opinion Editor to own this new direction.
I’m confident that free markets and personal liberties are right for America. I also believe these viewpoints are underserved in the current market of ideas and news opinion. I’m excited for us together to fill that void.
Jeff Bezos
https://x.com/JeffBezos/status/1894757287052362088
Lot’s of us believe in personal liberties and free markets–but there are often needed restrictions on these as well as other priorities we believe in.
So does Bezos have the same views as Elon Musk now?
Here is currently well-described as “on the brink of Hitlerian/Mussolini-esque fascism.” Frankly, “typical” looks pretty good in comparison.
A good (and accurate) translation of that is “Everything is binary. Nuance does not exist.”
Such a paradigm is not only objectively malarkey, it is irresponsible.
A true statement as far as it goes, but also subject to the nuance that you apparently have denied exists. For one thing, “free markets and personal liberties” needs to be prioritized, with “personal liberties” taking precedence. For another, they don’t automatically stack, i.e., your right to spend TWO BILLION DOLLARS on misleading advertising cannot supersede my right to foment a non-violent resistance of a mere ONE THOUSAND CRITICAL THINKERS against such misleading advertising (an example I just made up for illustrative purposes, and is not intended to be interpreted as a claim about anything that has actually happened).
“Tucker Carlson hasn’t yet returned my phone call.”
If a newspaper’s going to have an opinion page, they ought to have a genuine op-ed page (or genuine op-ed columns mixed in.)
The Post appears to have decided to have an opinion page without any op-ed. This is not, in my opinion, a good idea.