• MidnightPocket [comrade/them]
    ·
    57 minutes ago

    imagine paying for news.

    next imagine paying for news baked with pro-capitalist propaganda.

    now imagine cancelling that subscription because the capitalist propaganda wouldn't praise the blue capitalist.

  • Ram_The_Manparts [he/him]
    ·
    edit-2
    36 minutes ago

    Liberals: Love getting all my objectively correct information from unbiased news sources, I sure do hate propaganda!

    Also liberals: I hereby condemn this "news" source for not explicitly endorsing my preferred candidate! I WILL DRAG THEM TO HELL!!!

    yea

  • adultswim_antifa [he/him]
    ·
    35 minutes ago

    Trump calling stuff fake news and saying journalists are the enemy (heartbreaking) caused liberal trust of the media to skyrocket. They had more skepticism though not enough before that. Compared with conservatives, liberals claimed higher levels of trust of everything including literal right wing propaganda outlets since Trump. Conservatives basically only trust Fox News which is just about the only right wing propaganda that liberals didn't trust. So I hope they wake up to the fact that all media is owned by capitalists and there's apparently a lot of value they see in being able to influence public opinion.

  • brainw0rms [they/them]
    ·
    1 hour ago

    I always thought newspapers endorsing candidates was cringe anyway, tbh. I'm sure Bezos' motives were not altruistic, but I feel like people are making a bigger deal out of this than it really is.

  • halfpipe [they/them]
    ·
    3 hours ago

    This feels like a serious fuck up for the western media. They handwave the existence of their billionaire owners by saying that they don't determine what gets printed , even though that's an obvious lie , but now they're on record with the billionaire owner putting his foot down for Trump.

    • DragonBallZinn [he/him]
      ·
      1 hour ago

      With libs feeling betrayed, I hope I can set some of them on the leftist pipeline by offering them the writings of Thomas Frank.

      The whole “good rich” that liberals cozied up to was never meant to last.

    • InevitableSwing [none/use name]
      hexagon
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Liberals will say it's no biggie. Their nonsense argument will be that liberal billionaires should start buying newspapers.

  • thelastaxolotl [he/him]
    ·
    2 hours ago

    I actually support the libs that unsub from wapo, not because i care about them not endorsing kamala but because this will hurt the journalists in wapo that have been posting genocide denial stories in the paper for months

    • Ram_The_Manparts [he/him]
      ·
      40 minutes ago

      They're just going to move on to another paper that does genocide denial on the same level

    • InevitableSwing [none/use name]
      hexagon
      ·
      2 hours ago

      this will hurt the journalists in wapo that have been posting genocide denial stories in the paper for months

      I think their jobs are secure. If cutbacks are needed - the paper will fire the people least important and/or who make the least amount of money.

  • Feinsteins_Ghost [he/him]
    ·
    edit-2
    2 hours ago

    I’m lazy and don’t care all that much about Beezer facts but how much of his money is derived from the newspaper, versus everything ele? Because realistically unless that is a major source of it, I can’t see this doing much of anything. There’s A, plus AWS, which make him bank. Those two things need to be what people call up and cancel if they’re gonna call up and cancel anything.

    What do you call this, just token liberalism or something?

    Only people this is going to effect is the staffers at the magazine newspaper

    • GarbageShoot [he/him]
      ·
      16 minutes ago

      I think Bezos believes, with some reason, that it would hurt his name among some ghoul circles to be associated with an endorsement of Kamala over Trump (and the reverse is also true). It has basically nothing to do with the amount of money the paper makes (as OP demonstrates, this was actually bad for WP making money) and everything to do with Bezos's reputation.

  • InevitableSwing [none/use name]
    hexagon
    ·
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    I didn't put this in the dunk tank because I assume Bezos doesn't care at all. He uses the paper to advertise Prime etc. His bigger toy cost him twice as much - his $500m yacht. Also - he's clearly betting on a Trump win and he'll recoup any tiny WaPo losses via juicy federal contracts that come his way.

    • ComradeWizardmon2 [she/her]
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      Could have put in the dunk tank cause his lib readers were surprised to find out who they pay to propagandize them

      They didn't even learn anything from this, introspection won't go further than "how DARE he not endorse MY candidate!?!"

  • thethirdgracchi [he/him, they/them]
    ·
    2 hours ago

    I honestly cannot imagine canceling a subscription to a newspaper because it didn't endorse the candidate you want. Or any candidate at all. Bizarre echo chamber behavior. I'm sure The Economist will endorse Harris like it endorsed Biden. Won't stop me from reading that garbage because it's the news.

  • InevitableSwing [none/use name]
    hexagon
    ·
    3 hours ago

    https://subium.com/profile/joshuajfriedman.com/post/3l7o5ckrjya2y

    Mr. Bezos sir - you are canceled.

    Yesterday @apocalypticanow.bsky.social used the word "decimate" to describe what Bezos had done to his newspaper and that prediction is now made real and literal.