MarylandReporter.com will not be endorsing any political candidates this year or any other, even if we wanted to. But we don’t.
Nonprofit news media like MarylandReporter.com, or any nonprofit organization designated as a 501(c)(3) by the IRS, is forbidden from actively supporting political candidates or parties. If we did, we could lose our tax-exempt status.
Just as importantly, long before I founded MarylandReporter.com 15 years ago, I’ve opposed the unsigned editorials written by some vague, unnamed editorial board. That includes political endorsements. Who are these people, anyway? What gives them that right?
I firmly believe in strong, well-reasoned opinions and commentary from all points of view. I’ve written many over the years, all with my name attached. I’ve also written political endorsements and other editorials for my publisher at the Patuxent Publishing chain of newspapers in the 1980s and ‘90s. The editorials were signed by the publisher. It’s just like being a speechwriter for a politician or a corporate CEO.
It’s possible to write a compelling article or speech for someone else even if you disagree with the conclusion. It’s like formal debating in high school or college. A good debater, speech writer, or editorialist can argue both sides of an issue, though it’s easier and turns out better if you agree with the point of view expressed. The words come easier and more persuasively.
This opinion piece obviously is being written in the context of the decision by Jeff Bezos, Amazon founder and owner of The Washington Post, that the newspaper would not endorse for president this year. Staff members were outraged, an editor resigned, and a former top editor called it “cowardice.” Readers expecting an endorsement of Kamala Harris were canceling subscriptions, which may be the only way they feel they can express their displeasure. That strikes me as foolish, eliminating a reliable source of information.
Is there any doubt that the Post was going to endorse Harris? Is there any doubt that on balance, coverage, and particularly opinion in the Post lean left? Even people like ex-editor Marty Baron who are trashing Bezos for spiking the endorsement 11 days before the election, said the decision would have been OK a year or two ago.
Did Bezos not save the Post from its slow decline, boost its digital future, and support reams of highly critical coverage of Donald Trump for the past nine years? Is Donald Trump suddenly going to forgive all the Post’s negative coverage in the news pages, all the fact-checking, all the ridicule and censure in the opinion pages so he won’t go after the paper’s multibillionaire owner and his many government-regulated business interests?
Trump has repeatedly called out Bezos. The ex-and possible future president shows no signs of forgetting past slights or grievances.
When you say that the Post or The Baltimore Sun has endorsed a candidate for Senate what exactly does that mean? Do the reporters and editors vote to endorse? No. All the employees? No. The owner? Maybe. An unnamed group of three five or ten editors and columnists meeting behind closed doors? Usually.
Endorsements in major races have lost their power, though Angela Alsobrooks, for instance, mentions the Post nod in most of her ads. It signifies the Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate is OK, with accomplishments, the correct progressive policies, neither stupid nor corrupt. She is worth supporting.
Publishing no endorsement is not a big deal. Will it keep the Post from losing more than the $77 million it lost last year, a loss that led to 240 staff buyouts? I hope not.
As for unsigned editorials, I would not miss them, nor would most readers. No great loss.
Recent Comments