Newspaper publishers may fear Trump retribution for Harris endorsements

[Copernicus]

As of now, two major newspapers--The Washington Post and the LA Times--have decided not to endorse Kamala Harris for president. Donald Trump has openly expressed his intention to curtail opposition to him in the press, and there is a very real possibility that he will be in a position to do that. So their publishers have stopped their editorial staffs from publishing endorsements of Kamala Harris. They deny that there is any political message to be drawn from their actions, but people are definitely drawing it.

Ex-Editor Baron Decries 'Disturbing Spinelessness' Of Washington Post Not Endorsing For President​

Two More LA Times Editorial Board Members Resign After the Paper Withholds a Harris Endorsement​

 

[Secret Chief]

Presumably Mein Kampf was a good primer.

 

[Heyo]

Presumably Mein Kampf was a good primer.

Threats have worked for the Nazis, and Trump is using more and more of their play book. No wonder people are calling him a fascist (which he still isn't).

 

[Copernicus]

This kind of activity is how censorship starts. It isn't about the government occupying news organizations and dictating what they write. The way it works is that the news organizations censor themselves in anticipation of what the government would do if they didn't. So they "sanitize" the content of what gets published voluntarily in order to avoid adverse consequences.

 

[danieldemol]

Approximately half of US citizens don't realise that these threats are efficient means of eliminating competing narratives to misinformation in my view.

 

[Viker]

Approximately half of US citizens don't realise that these threats are efficient means of eliminating competing narratives to misinformation in my view.

That's why he threatens. He may never have intended to follow through with retribution on news media. He wouldn't have to if they're willing to censor themselves.

 

[Twilight Hue]

As of now, two major newspapers--The Washington Post and the LA Times--have decided not to endorse Kamala Harris for president. Donald Trump has openly expressed his intention to curtail opposition to him in the press, and there is a very real possibility that he will be in a position to do that. So their publishers have stopped their editorial staffs from publishing endorsements of Kamala Harris. They deny that there is any political message to be drawn from their actions, but people are definitely drawing it.

Ex-Editor Baron Decries 'Disturbing Spinelessness' Of Washington Post Not Endorsing For President​

Two More LA Times Editorial Board Members Resign After the Paper Withholds a Harris Endorsement​

It's good to see people finally waking up to the truth that the Democrats got an absolute vapid and clueless ditz appointed as a presidential candidate that won't and can't do anything for anybody because she doesn't have the foggiest idea whatsoever what she's doing and is well in over her head.

Translation? That she is just not going to take The Washington Post and the LA Times down with her as they got their own business and personal interests to look after than get themselves permanently associated with her losing name as she is getting showed the door never to be seen again after the election results come in.

Survival of the fittest baby.

 

[Mock Turtle]

It's good to see people finally waking up to the truth that the Democrats got an absolute vapid and clueless ditz appointed as a presidential candidate that won't and can't do anything for anybody because she doesn't have the foggiest idea whatsoever what she's doing and is well in over her head.

Translation? That she is just not going to take The Washington Post and the LA Times down with her as they got their own business and personal interests to look after than get themselves permanently associated with her losing name as she is getting showed the door never to be seen again after the election results come in.

Survival of the fittest baby.

And Trollan'Dump is such? (A comma makes all the difference all too often)

 

[Copernicus]

It's good to see people finally waking up to the truth that the Democrats got an absolute vapid and clueless ditz appointed as a presidential candidate that won't and can't do anything for anybody because she doesn't have the foggiest idea whatsoever what she's doing and is well in over her head.

The "people" to praise in the case of the Washington Post is just the billionaire owner, Jeff Bezos. He personally shut down what he knew would be an endorsement of Harris. Trump has had a long-standing vendetta against Amazon, so there is speculation that this was a move to preserve his business interests. He is signaling Trump. The billionaire who owns the LA Times, Patrick Soon-Shiong, shut down his paper's endorsement of Kamala Harris and a series of articles entitled "The Case Against Trump". Again, he is likely signaling Trump that he wants his businesses protected from retribution. This is how fascism works--an authoritarian government making sure that businesses serve the interests not of the country, but those who run the country.

Translation? That she is just not going to take The Washington Post and the LA Times down with her as they got their own business and personal interests to look after than get themselves permanently associated with her losing name as she is getting showed the door never to be seen again after the election results come in.

Survival of the fittest baby.

I think that you understand very well that the owners of these two newspapers respond to intimidation and threats from a vindictive man who may be on the brink of taking over the US government. It comes as no surprise to me that you favor of a government based on loyalty to an authoritarian head of state, as long as it is run by someone like Trump.

 

[Copernicus]

And here is another story to see Bezos as cozying up to Trump. Within hours of Bezos spiking the Harris endorsement in the Washington Post, executives of his aerospace business, Blue Origin, met with Donald Trump. Blue Origin is in stiff competition with Elon Musk's SpaceX for government contracts. No hint of corruption there, eh? Both Trump and Bezos understand pay to play. The gift to the Trump campaign could not be clearer.

Bezos faces criticism after executives met with Trump on day of Post’s non-endorsement​

 

[Twilight Hue]

The "people" to praise in the case of the Washington Post is just the billionaire owner, Jeff Bezos. He personally shut down what he knew would be an endorsement of Harris. Trump has had a long-standing vendetta against Amazon, so there is speculation that this was a move to preserve his business interests. He is signaling Trump. The billionaire who owns the LA Times, Patrick Soon-Shiong, shut down his paper's endorsement of Kamala Harris and a series of articles entitled "The Case Against Trump". Again, he is likely signaling Trump that he wants his businesses protected from retribution. This is how fascism works--an authoritarian government making sure that businesses serve the interests not of the country, but those who run the country.



I think that you understand very well that the owners of these two newspapers respond to intimidation and threats from a vindictive man who may be on the brink of taking over the US government. It comes as no surprise to me that you favor of a government based on loyalty to an authoritarian head of state, as long as it is run by someone like Trump.

Boy that's super duper paranoid.

 

[crossfire]

Holding off on presidential endorsements at this time is probably a wise idea at this time in order to preserve the mainstream media and the tradition of unbiased reporting. The mainstream media is being called the lamestream media by biased outlets catering to certain partisan readers (because the mainstream media outlets value an unbiased eye, unlike the partisan catering biased ones.) Without a strong tradition of unbiased reporting, then all we would be left with is those marketing to partisan biases and propaganda.

In this time of shocking events, just the unbiased reporting of those shocking events can speak for themselves, without any endorsement needed.
Just keep on reporting the unbiased news, to help clear out the jaundiced eye biased by partisanship.

 

[Copernicus]

Holding off on presidential endorsements at this time is probably a wise idea at this time in order to preserve the mainstream media and the tradition of unbiased reporting. The mainstream media is being called the lamestream media by biased outlets catering to certain partisan readers (because the mainstream media outlets value an unbiased eye, unlike the partisan catering biased ones.) Without a strong tradition of unbiased reporting, then all we would be left with is those marketing to partisan biases and propaganda.

In this time of shocking events, just the unbiased reporting of those shocking events can speak for themselves, without any endorsement needed.
Just keep on reporting the unbiased news, to help clear out the jaundiced eye biased by partisanship.

Endorsements are opinions issued by the editors, not news stories. They are actually quite traditional in presidential elections, but this is not a typical presidential election. Donald Trump, according to most historians, was either the worst, or close to the worst, president that the country has ever had. The real problem is the timing of this new policy--just as the process, which had been allowed to go ahead, was about to publish and just as the owner of the publication decided unilaterally to quash the editorial on the day top executives from his aerospace manufacturing company met with one of the presidential candidates. Do you really think that holding off on a presidential endorsement was a wise idea, given how it went down? I certainly don't. It stinks.

 

[F1fan]

And here is another story to see Bezos as cozying up to Trump. Within hours of Bezos spiking the Harris endorsement in the Washington Post, executives of his aerospace business, Blue Origin, met with Donald Trump. Blue Origin is in stiff competition with Elon Musk's SpaceX for government contracts. No hint of corruption there, eh? Both Trump and Bezos understand pay to play. The gift to the Trump campaign could not be clearer.

Bezos faces criticism after executives met with Trump on day of Post’s non-endorsement​

The odd thing is that Bezos may have saved his butt from Trump (if he wins) but has ruined his reputation by showing his fear and cowardice. And now it's revealed that both his paper and the LA Times would have endorsed Harris, which is in essence happened given this reporting. This also brings attention to how rich and influential people are afraid of Trump, and this is itself a negative bit of information for voters.

This adds to the understanding that Trump is a dangerous person. He is disturbed and unfit by all rational standards.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Presumably Mein Kampf was a good primer.

The left is more interested in the Communist Manifesto then Mein Kampf.

 

[Heyo]

The left is more interested in the Communist Manifesto then Mein Kampf.

Leftists who are only interested in the Manifesto are just as brainless as rightists who are interested in Mein Kampf.
Das Kapital, on the other hand, is an economic analysis that is rational and still taught in universities by serious economists.

 

[crossfire]

Endorsements are opinions issued by the editors, not news stories. They are actually quite traditional in presidential elections, but this is not a typical presidential election. Donald Trump, according to most historians, was either the worst, or close to the worst, president that the country has ever had. The real problem is the timing of this new policy--just as the process, which had been allowed to go ahead, was about to publish and just as the owner of the publication decided unilaterally to quash the editorial on the day top executives from his aerospace manufacturing company met with one of the presidential candidates. Do you really think that holding off on a presidential endorsement was a wise idea, given how it went down? I certainly don't. It stinks.

Which tradition is more important, the unbiased news or the opinion pieces? Right now, there is a metaphorical snowstorm of snowflakes who are easily triggered by an opinion piece that doesn't fit into their brainwashed versions of reality. Is chasing easily triggered snowflakes away from unbiased reporting and back to their alternative facts going to help the snowflakes overcome their brainwashing and embrace reality once again? Some of them seem to have the emotional control of a two year old. Do you slap a two year old's hand when they reach for nutritious food when they are surrounded by junk food?

 

[Copernicus]

Which tradition is more important, the unbiased news or the opinion pieces? Right now, there is a metaphorical snowstorm of snowflakes who are easily triggered by an opinion piece that doesn't fit into their brainwashed versions of reality. Is chasing easily triggered snowflakes away from unbiased reporting and back to their alternative facts going to help the snowflakes overcome their brainwashing and embrace reality once again? Some of them seem to have the emotional control of a two year old. Do you slap a two year old's hand when they reach for nutritious food when they are surrounded by junk food?

I think that you are talking about the MAGA crowd. Bear in mind that they don't usually even read the Washington Post, nor are they likely to be swayed by an endorsement of Harris in it. Nor is the LA Times endorsement really going to change votes in California. What is disturbing about these incidents is the intervention of the billionaire owners to cozy up to Donald Trump, who is promising to get revenge against his political enemies, especially those in the press who oppose him. Since the lack of endorsement is national news, it lends credibility to Donald Trump's campaign, especially at a time when he is sending out extremely dark and racist messages in campaign appearances.

 

[PureX]

Then he shouldn't be publishing a newspaper. Because he's a coward.