Why have no Op-Ed writers drawn a parallel between
the attempted blackmail of the American people by
Donald Trump's government shutdown tantrum and
David Pecker's "apoplectic" attempted blackmail of
Jeff Bezos for suggesting that AMI's attacks were
motivated by Pecker's desire to suck up to Trump (in
hopes of getting Saudi financing to buy Time Magazine}?
If, as at least one prominent commentator has suggested,
this affair leads to the exposure and collapse of AMI and
the National Enquirer, and its gross pro-Trump propaganda
disappears from American supermarket checkout aisles,
including its prominent place in Safeway stores here in
Berkeley, Jeff Bezos will be my hero, no matter how rich he gets.
It's lame of me to post twice on this piece, but after
reading the comments below doubting Bezos' hands-off
approach to the Post's content, I feel I must call attention
to the Wall Street Journal's very different condition under
the ownership of Rupert Murdoch.
It is believed that Trump and Murdoch talk frequently, even
daily, and, after Trump's election, the WSJ went soft on
Trump, apparently as a matter of editorial policy.
Here's a quote from a leaked memo by Gerry Baker,
Managing Editor of the WSJ: "If we are to use the term 'lie'
in our reporting, then we have to be confident about the
subject's state of knowledge and his moral intent."
That's from "The Wall Street Journal's Trump Problem,"
by Lucia Graves in the 10 Sep 17 Guardian, a depressing
account of Murdoch's influence over WSJ editorial policy.
I recommend the whole piece if you want to understand
the crisis in contemporary American journalism.
I've seen nothing to suggest Bezos has in any way influenced
the Post's coverage, other than by being newsworthy,
and I'm pleased to see the NY Times acknowledge that.
I hate to think what America would be like without the
current heroic reportage of the Times and the Post.
7
Not to praise the world's richest man for standing up to a blackmailing bully who is intimately connected to the world's most powerful national leader-- in fact, who has already admitted in court to have done his dirty work-- would have been odd indeed, and a missed opportunity.
2
I am not really interested in Bezo's love life, and as far as I am concerned, he has not only taken his share of the pie, but a great many other people's share as well, but........ comparing the Washington Post to a paper that stated on its front page one time that aliens from outer space were dressed in business suits, and running our government, is pretty ludicrous.
2
Anyone who has ever fallen in love with the wrong person and been disappointed by them can sympathize with Jeff Bezos in this horrible situation. Not only did he place his trust and confidence in the wrong person but to have his private life slammed across the Internet only to be exploited by criminals intent on extorting him is a nightmare I would not wish on my worst enemy - except maybe my ex-husband. ;)
8
I’m not really keeping up with the story much but the last I heard his girlfriend is a blabbermouth Who was telling all her friends about their relationship and sharing photos. So it’s her, I guess, and maybe her brother who have leaked all that stuff. Hard as it may be for Mr. Bezos do not attach a political motive; sounds to me like this is just a same-o same-o Enquirer type story. I just have a hard time understanding how a person of his means cannot have a discreet relationship and would also observe that he’s actually maneuvered his complaint to use the fact of his ownership of the Washington post to create a dubious criminal complaint against the another news organization.
4
Remember Murdoch's news empire's phone hacking scandal is the U.K.. This is the mirror opposite
3
It would have been a sad thing if we had lost the Washington Post. But Jeff Bezos bought it, made it stronger, and stays out of the news room. That alone makes him a hero in my book.
As for him being rich, good for him. I don't resent rich people. It is true that the mega-rich are overdoing it at the current time, and need to be brought down a few pegs. But when the common folk are doing ok, I am happy for rich people to enjoy their money and leave me to my plebian pursuits.
22
The hazards of the super rich owning media outlets !
2
The chances that the Enquirer expose on Jeff Bezos was “political” are much less probable than the $3 billion in subsidies promised by New York to land an Amazon headquarters in Queens. To provide such a staggering subsidy for the mere promise of 25,000 jobs is unlikely to be perceived as an “Art of the Deal” inspiration. Then again, if you are a wannabe president currently occupying the governors mansion in Albany, bestowing tax payer funds upon the richest man in the world and owner of an influential newspaper that can flog your opponents would qualify. For anyone who doubts that, the shrill admonitions from Governor Cuomo in response to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s audacious questioning of New York's largesse are telling.
Complaints now emanating from Jeff Bezos about the potential exposure of his pecker by the Pecker who runs the National Enquirer is a distraction. At the end of the day Jeff Bezos is a businessman and despite assurances from the Washington Post that he doesn’t influence their editorials or the content of their reporting he determines whether they continue to receive paychecks. Journalistic integrity aside, it’s tough to bite the hand that feeds you. Having an advocate in the White House would undoubtably enhance the possibility of fending off congressional restrictions to his business model. That’s a fact that isn’t lost on Bezos or Governor Cuomo.
5
Jeff Bezos, like Donald Trump, is an adulterer, a serial liar and a con-man. Bezos is also a pervert who sends out naked pictures of himself, a swindler running the corrupt Amazon, and a greedy person who wants free real estate in New York City. Why do Americans worship lowlife billionaires?
6
@Make America Sane
Your overt hatred of Mr. Bezos clouds your perspective.
Bezos is a wonder, a man who, through his initiative has made himself the richest person on the planet, that is quite an accomplishment.
He shows considerable personal character in addressing the Pecker issue rather than sequestering it.
Adultery is another matter, yet not a subject that should terribly shock an adult in this day and age as it is committed by an unknown, but substantial, percentage of both men and women. Few rigidly obey all the commandments.
Mr. Bezos may not be a choir boy or boy scout in his lifestyle, but swindler and Amazon being corrupt are not terms i would use to describe one of the greatest success stories in the history of business.
4
The Post has thrived under Bezo's ownership as any business will thrive when hundreds of millions of dollars are injected into it.
But the idea that it is still an independent voice without the shackles that come from following the agenda of a powerful owner is ludicrous.
Amazon is poised to completely transform an area near Crystal City, out by Reagan National Airport, to the detriment of lots of poor people. And the Post has been largely silent except for that vague editorial cited here that ran before the deal was announced.
If Bezos woke up tomorrow and decided that Donald Trump was the saving grace of America and needed to be supported in all of his endeavors, Marty Barron would wake up with that notion the day after tomorrow.
So far, Barron can say Bezos hasn't interfered because their interests coincide -- push an aggressive anti-Trump agenda and ignore the encroaching tentacles of Amazon. That will probably not always be the case.
6
As Oscar Wilde said, "The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about."
The Enquirer is a classic news bottom feeder. Celebrities have a love hate relationship with gossip feeders. It keeps them visible on check out stands without reading the stories everyone knows are fake.
But these tactics of intimidation and greed are out of bounds for people who are not celebs. As embarrassing as these stories are for Bezos, I admire him for standing up with a square jaw and fighting back.
Perhaps some of the Enquirer's targets will band together with Bezos to set up a legal fight and send the bottom feeder into oblivion.
15
"Mr. Baron said the paper had not changed its approach to its coverage of Mr. Bezos or his business interests. Mr. Baron has said that he, along with other executives, talks with Mr. Bezos about “strategy” every two weeks or so, but that the discussions do not touch on the paper’s coverage."
Why print this, it is like printing "Mr. Jones claimed he had 5 lamborghini's, 29 million dollars, and a 12 inch male appendage, we didn't verify any of this, we are just going to take him at his word, because, well it is convenient for us to do so."
The Washington Post would NEVER answer that question differently, since they have NO incentive to. So why bother asking, why not investigate?
2
"The paper has flourished under Mr. Bezos’ ownership. Since he bought the newspaper in 2013 for $250 million, The Post has added over 200 people to its newsroom, which now numbers 900 journalists, and won plaudits and awards for its coverage of, among other subjects, the Trump administration. The paper has more than 1.5 million digital subscribers, and the business has been profitable for the past three years."
I find it interesting that the journalists of the NYT are willing to refer to the Washington Post as "the business" and judge its success on the basis of the extent to which it has "been profitable." That alone tells you all that you need to know about the state of journalism in America today.
2
@jack I'm a semi-retired journalist who has watched over a generation as big money bought and downsized media. Observed the demise of many news outlets. They can't remain in business if not profitable. Remember, too, we have a president who frequently calls out the "for New York Times and Washington Post." It's important to let readers know the media organizations are profitable.
3
It seems that if the editor of the Times had been "blackmailed" to keep a story quiet, there would be an editorial that appeared in the Times about that event. If not, a person might argue that the Times was not supporting open and honest reporting. The fact that Mr. Bezos is incredibly wealthy does not figure in to the rightness of him fighting extortion. It only, as he points out, provides him with the means to do it as so many others cannot. Fight on Mr. Bezos and report on it Washington Post!
16
Could the Post hire a seasoned journalist from, say, the NY Times or Wall Street Journal, to write the storylines for the Post, so as to avoid the appearance of conflict ?
4
“Had they not editorialized, perhaps The Times would be doing a piece about the absence of such an editorial and what did that mean?” - Donald Graham, former an owner of the Post.
Exactly this.
The Washington Post seems to be covering the possible extortion story as well as the New York Times or any other major news organization. WAPO even seems a little less hesitant about objectivity. It's as though there has been a general reluctance by all to go after one of their own, even if it's the drunk uncle who no one is willing to claim in public. There's a line between news collection and extortion. American Media certainly seems to have crossed it. Just because Jeff Bezos isn't the world's favorite rich guy doesn't mean that criminal intent to do him harm is acceptable.
29
Perhaps the Post should do a front page editorial declaring a conflict of interest. They could explain why any coverage of the Bezos personal story involving the National Inquirer could not be seen as unbiased in light of Bezos’ ownership of the Post. There is no shortage of media all over this rather tawdry tale. The notion of a conflict of interest is very common in court related matters.
5
The real independence of the Post and Times vs. the interdependence of Trump, Fox and other right wing outlets makes a very clear comment on who is on the side of the angels.
The bright line separating the two camps has never been clearer. One says determine the truth and report it, no matter what. The other says, say whatever is necessary for our side to win. They are two different universes, with completely opposed understandings of what it takes to be a good person and lead a successful life.
I have worked for the Post in different capacities in years past and can vouch that they are as squeaky clean as any organization in history. The only thing I didn’t like about them was they made me spell The Washington Post with a capped T. Too self regarding, I thought, for a paper in their position.
18
Jeff Bezos is an American oligarch, and the great thing about the American brand of super-rich, super-powerful is that they get actual, factual and sometimes critical coverage (mostly) without lethal results for the reporters and editors. What a country!
20