As someone who used to be on the editorial board of a mediium-sized newspaper, I am surprised at the trend of among the nation's publications to not issue an endorsement for President of the United States.
The decision of the Washington Post and Los Angeles Times to not give a recommendation for President made the news recently. The nonendorsemnt was met with surprise, criticism, resignations of some of journalists and subscription cancellations.
However, it should not have been a surprise nor should it have been reported as something unusual. The Post and the Times were not alone in not endorsing a preference for President. Many newspapers did not issue an endorsement as a matter of longstanding policy. However, others joined a growing trend among periodicals to avoid the appearance of partisanship, according to a surve by according to a survey by Semafor.
FYI: See what publications have given or not given an endorsement for President.
Let the facts speak for themselves and let the readers make up their own mind, they rationalize. Or, so they say.
That reasoning rings hollow because the same publications have no compunction in making recommendations for other elected offices or complicated measures.
Despite the trend to avoid making a recommendation, it was still a disappointment to see many respected publications like the Washington Post and L.A. Times because many of those same publications have called this year's election as one of the most important to face the nation in years. It is not, as some jaded critics claim, a chose between Tweedledee and Tweedledumt.
Regular readers of this blog know that the very existance of US democracy based on the Constitution is at stake.
The contrast between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump is so stark it seems that it would be easy to make a recommendation that would steer the country in the direction of democracy as put forth in the US Constitution.
Could the newspapers' abandonment of their traditional endorsements be out fear? Might the giant corporations that own the majority of newspapers be hedging their bets in case Trump somehow wins the election and follows through with his threat of punishing "the enemy withinin." He has often put mainstream media at the top of his enemies list.
There may be another factor for those newspapers not part of corporate chains but owned by billionaires that is less complicated than deciding the fate of the country. It may come down to common greed. Trump's tax laws that favor the top 1% may be a factor in some of the billionaire owners of major newspapers like Jeff Bezos' Washington Post and Patrick Soon-Shiong's Los Angeles Times, both of which chose to not make an endorsement.
Still, many newspapers, including the august New York Times, the Boston Globe and the San Francisco Chronicle have made recommendations, putting country above profit. Of the newspapers that did give an endorsement, most of them recommended Harris.
For the staid, stuffy New York Times, the choice is a no-brainer:
No comments:
Post a Comment