Sally's Substack

Breaking - Bezos Announcement about WaPo Opinion

This just in from Jeff Bezos — the upshot: He is changing the opinion page to focus on, defend and support personal liberties and free markets, both of which he believes are being underserved in the current marketplace of ideas and news opinion. His current OpEd editor couldn’t provide him with an enthusiastic “hell, yes” and so he is looking for a new editor to spearhead this endeavor. See my quick input below his statement.

@JeffBezos

I shared this note with the Washington Post team this morning: I’m writing to let you know about a change coming to our opinion pages. We are going to be writing every day in support and defense of two pillars: personal liberties and free markets. We’ll cover other topics too of course, but viewpoints opposing those pillars will be left to be published by others. There was a time when a newspaper, especially one that was a local monopoly, might have seen it as a service to bring to the reader’s doorstep every morning a broad-based opinion section that sought to cover all views. Today, the internet does that job. I am of America and for America, and proud to be so. Our country did not get here by being typical. And a big part of America’s success has been freedom in the economic realm and everywhere else. Freedom is ethical — it minimizes coercion — and practical — it drives creativity, invention, and prosperity. I offered David Shipley, whom I greatly admire, the opportunity to lead this new chapter. I suggested to him that if the answer wasn’t “hell yes,” then it had to be “no.” After careful consideration, David decided to step away. This is a significant shift, it won’t be easy, and it will require 100% commitment — I respect his decision. We’ll be searching for a new Opinion Editor to own this new direction. I’m confident that free markets and personal liberties are right for America. I also believe these viewpoints are underserved in the current market of ideas and news opinion. I’m excited for us together to fill that void. Jeff

My quick input:

Sometimes, folks, or at least those of you who have been fighting this fight since 2009, don’t you just feel like, geez, it’s about time (and also feel a bit frustrated that we’ve been clamoring for this for about 17 years and only now someone is listening)!

However, I have sort of mixed feelings about this. It is the duty of the media to provide opposing viewpoints. But, our media is failing us in providing that and has gone to the extreme of clearly one-sided reporting and downright suppression of the truth in reporting and advocating for D candidates and policies. So, yes, the news in general and the opinion news in particular have been skewed in one direction (for most of my lifetime and probably most of yours).

Kudos to Bezos for trying to provide a counter balance to that.

I don’t deny that this is needed. But I’m also a bit concerned about focusing only on PRO opinion pieces. I’m not even sure that is completely realistic.

I anticipate that in providing a pro-personal liberty and pro-free market viewpoint authors will implicity and sometimes explicitly address counterarguments. Wouldn’t they have to do that to make their cases? Isn’t it always stronger if you can address, even anticipate, the opposition? At least I HOPE this happens because I am concerned about providing any opinion news in a bubble. In persuading people or educating them regarding an issue, it’s imperative opposition is brought into the arguments so people can learn and understand — providing young people with critical thinking skills, so lacking in our educational system, that would inform them with enough ammo to debate these issues with others.

We are talking opinion here — not NEWS. As regards the latter, absolutely, the truth should be reported with as little injection of a personal opinion or skewing to meet a political agenda, as possible. (And, to the extent any NEWS reportage is skewed, it should be balanced by any existing alternative arguments.) The news should not be biased and the proper home for the battle of opinions lies in the OpEd section. Bezos’s proposed changes are OpEd specific and while defending and promoting liberty and free markets is awesome, I just want to make sure it doesn’t morph into its own brand of propaganda.

Further, I imagine there will be conflicts especially in the arena of personal liberties where, let’s say on the trans issue, one’s personal liberty will infringe on another’s. This is unavoidable and it would be incumbent on any Opinion Editor to present a variety of viewpoints, even if it is in furtherance of a particular POV.

But I like his pro-American stance (he was always a libertarian, as far as I knew) and he seems to have moved into the category of Tea Party American given that those two pillars were fundamental to the Tea Party Movement. Throw in lower taxes and lower spending and he’d be a regular Tea Party Guy. I don’t think he is just capitalizing on who is in power in as much as doing the right thing and finally having the courage to do it, backed by the Nov. 5th Mandate.

What took many of us minutes to understand has taken some of our supposed geniuses decades.

;-)

In any case, I welcome the counter balance to what still amounts to be a very skewed portrayal of the news and accompanying opinion. I imagine the folks at WaPo are FREAKING OUT! Waaah. They can commiserate with their Administrative State pals getting DOGED.

Thanks for reading and please share your comments,

Sally