ARTICLE 19 is deeply concerned about the recent decision taken by the owners of the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times to prevent endorsements of Kamala Harris in the upcoming presidential election. This interference, reportedly due to concern about potential retaliation should Donald Trump win re-election, is a clear example of the erosion of press freedom seen when democracies are under attack. This decision, and billionaire influence, not only effectively silence critical voices during a pivotal election, but also threaten editorial independence and media freedom in the country. In our experience, the perception that financial interests dictate editorial choices can empower autocrats and hinder open discourse. As the election approaches, ARTICLE 19 urges media outlets to reclaim their commitment to integrity and resist pressures that stifle free speech, reinforcing their role as champions of democracy.
Last week, billionaires Jeff Bezos, owner of the Washington Post, and Patrick Soon-Shiong, owner of the Los Angeles Times, stopped their respective papers from endorsing Kamala Harris.
Bezos, in a column in the Washington Post, defended the decision as a principled stance to avoid the perception of bias. However, the timing of the decision, 11 days out from the election and after the editorial had already been drafted, raises serious concerns.
First, ARTICLE 19 is concerned that the influence of billionaire owners in this matter poses significant threats to the editorial independence of the media outlets. Newspaper endorsements of political candidates have a long history in the Unites States. Although their merit and influence can be debated, they are nevertheless an important prerogative of the editorial boards. As newspapers face an economic crisis and a polarised environment in the United States, fewer are daring to endorse, a troubling trend of timidity among media outlets in the face of these pressures.
The perception that financial interests may dictate journalistic integrity creates an environment where media outlets could be hesitant to challenge powerful political figures. This apprehension is particularly acute given Donald Trump’s present rhetoric against his critics and history of targeting the media. As former Post editor Marty Baron noted, this decision may embolden Trump to further intimidate the press, suggesting that fear rather than principle is guiding these choices.
Second, ARTICLE 19 believes that this decision undermines the principles of open discourse that are vital to democratic governance. The impression that endorsements are influenced by ownership rather than editorial integrity can undermine public confidence in the integrity of media outlets. This erosion of trust is particularly concerning in an era marked by increasing polarisation, where the media plays a crucial role in fostering access to information. This, in turn can further enable autocrats and powerful entities to manipulate public opinion and suppress dissent.
The decision by the owners of these major newspapers not to endorse a presidential candidate signals a troubling retreat from the role of the outlets as champions of democracy and free speech.
In the context of the forthcoming election, the role of independent media is more critical than ever. The Washington Post’s longstanding motto – ‘Democracy Dies in Darkness’ – serves as a poignant reminder that silence in the face of tyranny is not an option.
ARTICLE 19 urges all media in the United States to reclaim their commitment to journalistic integrity and resist pressures to silence critical voices. In doing so, they will not only uphold their own values but also protect the democratic principles that underpin our society.