Trump has already punished Bezos for the Washington Post

When Donald Trump first ran for president, he began threatening that Amazon and Jeff Bezos would pay the price. “If I become president – ​​oh, will they have problems? You will have such problems,” he warned. Trump's complaint to Amazon focused on Bezos' ownership of the Washington posta connection the president made no attempt to obscure. He was angry about what he called “Amazon Washington.” postand falsely claimed it avoided “internet taxes.” In 2018, Gabriel Sherman reported that Trump was “obsessed” with retaliating against Bezos post's reporting.

“We receive calls every hour from reporters in Washington post “I ask ridiculous questions,” he once complained, “And I’m telling you: This belongs to Jeff Bezos, who controls Amazon, as a toy.” Amazon can get away with murder for tax purposes. He uses the Washington post for power.”

In 2019, Trump found his leverage. Amazon was set to receive a $10 billion cloud computing contract from the Pentagon. The Pentagon suddenly changed course and denied Amazon the contract. A former speechwriter for Defense Secretary James Mattis reported that Trump told Mattis to “screw Amazon.”

This is the context in which the post’s decision to increase its planned support of Kamala Harris should be considered.

The postThe argument is that it has a policy of withholding support in presidential elections. I believe that the policy is correct in the abstract. Recommendations for local races make a big difference because readers often have paid little attention and need an authoritative recommendation. People who read newspapers like that post I don't need such suggestions. Supporting national candidates only creates the appearance of bias and has little practical benefit. The newspaper can declare that its endorsement has no bearing on its reporting and that this statement is correct, but there is no reason to force every journalist to refute the appearance of partisanship created by national endorsements.

That is, the process by which the post Having come to this decision stinks to high heaven. The newspaper's editorial board had planned and reportedly written its endorsement before management revoked it. The abstract journalistic reason for ending national advertising was apparent months and years in advance. The post announced his decision in the last minute of a razor-thin election campaign, in an atmosphere in which conventional wisdom (though not necessarily the polls) increasingly sees Trump as the favorite.

The lack of one post Endorsement doesn't matter. What matters is the entirely realistic prospect that Bezos will continue to lean on the journalists in his employ to make their work less offensive to a president who has proven he is willing and able to cash in on Bezos to pull the bag if he opposes him.