Mother Jones Reader,
National newspaper endorsements probably don’t make much of a difference in presidential elections, so the billionaire owners of the Washington Post and LA Times spiking endorsements of Kamala Harris that their respective editorial boards had already drafted probably won’t move the needle.
But in terms of what we can expect from America’s media moguls in the face of a growing authoritarian movement, these were lights-flashing-red moments—and that should mobilize everyone who cares about democracy.
Because this is not just about LA Times owner Patrick Soon-Shiong and WaPo owner Jeff Bezos. It’s about whether we can afford a press dependent on billionaires and corporate bean-counters; a press whose courage (or spinelessness) depends on how the owner is feeling that day.
Here’s just a sample of who controls our major newsrooms right now. The five biggest newspaper chains in America are owned by a hedge fund, a private equity fund, another hedge fund, a billionaire family, and another billionaire family. Among major television news networks, owners include the Murdoch family, Disney, Comcast, Paramount, and Warner Brothers Discovery.
Will these owners respect journalistic independence? We don’t have to guess. Soon-Shiong was previously in the headlines for pushing to kill LA Times coverage involving a friend of his and his dog. (His editor in chief ultimately resigned.) Lewis, the publisher Bezos hired for the Post, reportedly pushed his team to stop investigating his role in a British eavesdropping scandal. NBC head Cesar Conde put a powerful documentary about Trump’s child separation policy on ice until after the election. And let’s not even talk about Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk, whose platforms profit from pumping out disinformation while suppressing actual news.
But the newsroom pressures of the past may be child’s play compared to what could happen under a second Trump administration. Already, simpering executives are lining up to make nice with a president whose vengeance could punish and whose whim could reward them.
We can’t look into Bezos’ or Soon-Shiong’s hearts to see whether their decisions were driven by “anticipatory obedience,” by hopes of drawing conservative readers—whom Bezos, according to the New York Times, has identified as a growth market—or by fears for their bottom line. But such nonchalance certainly doesn’t inspire confidence that they’ll show any spine when authoritarians knock on their newspapers’ doors.
Depressing? Yes. But let’s not end the story there, because billionaires and corporations are not the only players in the media business. There are thousands of newsrooms all over the country that are independently owned or nonprofit organizations, including Mother Jones. No one owns us, and no one ever will. We’re accountable only to you, our audience. Seventy percent of our budget comes from individual supporters, and so let me say, as loudly and urgently as I can, that I hope you’ll join them. That’s what gives us the independence to investigate oligarchs instead of cowering before them.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.