Jeff Bezos says refusal to endorse Kamala was ‘principled,’ a result of lack of public trust in a media

"Something we are doing is clearly not working," he said in a guest essay for the Washington Post. Bezos is already reportedly looking to bring on more conservative columnists to the outlet.

"We must be accurate, and we must be believed to be accurate," he said, making an analogy between newspapers and voting machines, which he said must also meet those two requirements. Bezos believes that media, namely the Washington Post, is "failing on the second requirement."

"Most people believe the media is biased," he said. "Anyone who doesn’t see this is paying scant attention to reality, and those who fight reality lose. Reality is an undefeated champion."

While he noted that it would be "easy" to blame others, he placed the blame squarely on the shoulders of media for the "long and continuing fall in credibility," which he said was also a "decline in impact." It's his view that publishing a presidential endorsement does "nothing to tip the scales of an election" and that these endorsements do little to enhance credibility.

The LA Times' Mariel Garza, in her resignation from that outlet over their refusal to endorse Kamala Harris, noted too that she did not believe the paper's endorsement would influence voters. But it was her belief that it was wrong to stay silent, nonetheless. For Bezos, that lack of impact is enough of a reason to not move forward with the endorsement. USA Today has also declined to endorse a presidential candidate after backing Biden in 2020.

In Bezos view, "what presidential endorsements actually do is create a perception of bias. A perception of non-independence." His ending them entirely for the outlet, he said, "is a principled decision, and it's the right one." In so noting, he calls back to previous publishers who had the same view, such as the publisher during the lead up and US entry into World War II. Bezos hopes that this small gesture will be a "meaningful step in the right direction" toward gaining back some measure of public trust.

Bezos assured readers that this was his decision and not a result of any kind of "quid pro quo" with either political campaign. "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," he said.

He also is keenly aware that outlets like the Washington Post and The New York Times are not being read by most media consumers, and he places the blame for this on the outlets themselves. "Many people are turning to off-the-cuff podcasts, inaccurate social media posts and other unverified news sources, which can quickly spread misinformation and deepen divisions. The Washington Post and the New York Times win prizes, but increasingly we talk only to a certain elite. More and more, we talk to ourselves," he said.

In refusing to endorse Harris, Bezos intends to prevent the paper from fading "into irrelevance." He doesn't want the outlet to succumb to the onslaught of new media. "It’s too important. The stakes are too high. Now more than ever the world needs a credible, trusted, independent voice, and where better for that voice to originate than the capital city of the most important country in the world?"

Consumer trust in media has been on a sharp decline and in place of mainstream and legacy media outlets like the Post, The Times, and the big networks, the public has turned to many other options, such as podcasts and alternative media outlets (like this one). In many ways, the decline of old media has allowed openings for new outlets, new voices, and new perspectives. The landscape that Bezos is attempting to regain access to has changed since he first bought the paper back in 2013, and as many of his staff flee, tendering resignation upon resignation, it's unclear if the public is ready to turn back to the paper that is now roundly mocked for their slogan "democracy dies in darkness."