In a message to employees, Will Lewis stated that the outlet’s goal is “to help our readers make up their own minds.”
For the first time since 1988, The Washington Post has decided not to support a presidential candidate. Instead, the publication will allow readers to choose between former President Trump and Vice President Harris. This will be the case for all upcoming elections.
“The Washington Post will not be endorsing a presidential candidate in this election,” stated Post CEO Will Lewis in a message to employees. Not in any presidential election in the future. We are going back to our original practice of not supporting presidential candidates.
Lewis used a 1960 editorial board letter outlining the paper’s stance at the time—that it should not support presidential candidates—to justify the call. Additionally, he tried to avoid criticism of the choice by:
We understand that this could be interpreted in a variety of ways, such as an implicit support for one candidate, a criticism of another, or a resignation of accountability. “That is unavoidable,” wrote Lewis. That’s not how we view things. We believe it aligns with the principles that The Post has always upheld and what we look for in a leader: courage and moral integrity in support of the American ideal, respect for the rule of law, and adherence to human freedom in all its manifestations. We also interpret it as a declaration in favor of our readers’ autonomy to decide for themselves who should be elected president, one of the most important decisions facing America.
Marty Baron, a former editor of the Post, swiftly criticized the move, calling it “cowardice, with democracy as its casualty.”This will be interpreted by Donald Trump as a call to further threaten the owner, Jeff Bezos, and others. Unsettling lack of bravery at a place known for its bravery,” he continued.
According to a Post employee, the decision was “shocking” and left many wondering why it was made so close to the election.
The Post Guild, a union that represents the publication’s editorial staff, claims that an editorial supporting Harris had already been written and that Bezos, the Post’s owner, decided not to publish it for unknown reasons.
The Post’s lack of endorsement was covered by Oliver Darcy at Status earlier this week, but Friday’s ruling appeared to seal the deal.
Additionally, the Post’s action was taken just days after the Los Angeles Times was embroiled in controversy over its choice to not endorse in the 2024 race. Many employees were incensed by the decision, which they believed was inexplicable, and editorial writers left the company in droves.
Nika, Harris’ daughter, claimed that the decision was related to Harris’ position on the Israel-Palestine issue, while others conjectured that it might be because of owner Patrick Soon-Shiong’s involvement in the medical industry, where government regulation can destroy a business. “This is not a Donald Trump vote. She wrote, “This is a refusal to ENDORSE a candidate who is in charge of a war on children.”
