Furor over Washington Post’s decision to not endorse presidential candidate: ‘Stab in the back’, ‘dying in darkness’
GuardianOCT 2024
Ex-WaPo Editor: Bezos Struck 'Quid-Pro-Quo' Deal With Trump
Image copyright: Cooper Neill/Contributor/Getty Images Sport via Getty Images
The Spin
Republican narrative
The Post's decision to refrain from endorsing a presidential candidate is a step toward true journalistic neutrality. It allows readers to form their own opinions without undue influence from the paper. The allegations of a quid pro quo are baseless and ignore the publisher's stated reasons for the decision.
Democratic narrative
The decision not to endorse a candidate is a cowardly move that undermines democracy. It's a clear example of corporate interests bowing to political pressure, potentially sacrificing journalistic integrity for financial gain. This sets a dangerous precedent for media self-censorship and could further erode press freedom.
Metaculus Prediction
Public Figures
The Controversies
Political split
LEFT
RIGHT
© 2025 Improve the News Foundation. All rights reserved.Version 6.15.0
© 2025 Improve the News Foundation.
All rights reserved.
Version 6.15.0