Jeff Bezos Defends Washington Post Decision To Not Endorse In 2024 Presidential Race, Says “No Quid Pro Quo Of Any Kind Is At Work Here”
The Washington Post owner Jeff Bezos defended the decision of the publication not endorse in the 2024 presidential race, acknowledging that “inadequate planning” and not some “intentional strategy” was to blame for creating a backlash.
“I would also like to be clear that no quid pro quo of any kind is at work here,” Bezos wrote in an op ed in the Post this evening. “Neither campaign nor candidate was consulted or informed at any level or in any way about this decision.”
More from Deadline
Bezos instead said that the decision was motivated by a desire to “increase our credibility,” pointing to low trust in the media in a recent Gallup poll.
He wrote, “Presidential endorsements do nothing to tip the scales of an election. No undecided voters in Pennsylvania are going to say, ‘I’m going with Newspaper A’s endorsement.’ None. What presidential endorsements actually do is create a perception of bias. A perception of non-independence. Ending them is a principled decision, and it’s the right one.”
The non-endorsement has led to the resignations of a handful of staff members and to a subscriber revolt. According to NPR, more than 200,000 have cancelled their digital subscriptions since the decision was announced on Friday.
Bezos was criticized by figures such as Martin Baron, the former executive editor, who called it “cowardice, with democracy as its casualty.” The decision was criticized as an effort by Bezos to try to win favor with Donald Trump — given that the Post was ready to endorse Kamala Harris. When he was in the White House, Trump consistently attacked Bezos, and threatened to investigate the company he founded, Amazon, for antitrust violations.
In his op ed, Bezos acknowledged the suspicion that arose on Friday. Shortly after the announcement, the news broke that the CEO of Bezos’ space company, Blue Origin, was meeting with Trump that same day.
“I sighed when I found out, because I knew it would provide ammunition to those who would like to frame this as anything other than a principled decision,” Bezos wrote. “But the fact is, I didn’t know about the meeting beforehand.”
He also wrote that when “it comes to the appearance of conflict, I am not an ideal owner of The Post. Every day, somewhere, some Amazon executive or Blue Origin executive or someone from the other philanthropies and companies I own or invest in is meeting with government officials.”
“You can see my wealth and business interests as a bulwark against intimidation, or you can see them as a web of conflicting interests,” he wrote. “Only my own principles can tip the balance from one to the other. I assure you that my views here are, in fact, principled, and I believe my track record as owner of The Post since 2013 backs this up. You are of course free to make your own determination, but I challenge you to find one instance in those 11 years where I have prevailed upon anyone at The Post in favor of my own interests. It hasn’t happened.”
Bezos did suggested that the timing of the announcement of the non-endorsement — 11 days before Election Day — was a mistake.
He wrote that “declining to endorse presidential candidates is not enough to move us very far up the trust scale, but it’s a meaningful step in the right direction. I wish we had made the change earlier than we did, in a moment further from the election and the emotions around it. That was inadequate planning, and not some intentional strategy.”
Best of Deadline
Sign up for Deadline's Newsletter. For the latest news, follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.