Washington Post Faces Exodus of Subscribers Following Surprising Decision

The Washington Post’s decision not to endorse a presidential candidate has sparked a massive backlash, leading to over 200,000 subscription cancellations.

At a Glance

Washington Post announced it won’t endorse a presidential candidate, breaking from tradition.
Decision caused outrage among liberal readers, leading to widespread subscription cancellations.
Over 200,000 digital subscribers (8% of total paid circulation) canceled by midday Monday.
Internal dissent led to resignations and public criticism from staff and former employees.
Publisher William Lewis defends decision, citing return to journalistic independence.

Washington Post Faces Subscriber Exodus

The Washington Post, a longstanding bastion of liberal journalism, has found itself at the center of a controversy that has led to a significant loss in readership. The newspaper’s decision not to endorse a presidential candidate, particularly Vice President Kamala Harris, has sparked outrage among its predominantly liberal audience, resulting in a wave of subscription cancellations.

According to reports, over 200,000 digital subscribers canceled their subscriptions by midday on Monday, representing approximately 8% of the paper’s total paid circulation of 2.5 million. This mass exodus has been dubbed a “cancellation movement,” with many readers sharing their cancellation confirmations on social media as a form of political protest.

An endorsement of Kamala Harris was drafted by Post staffers but had yet to be published, according to sources who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

The decision not to publish was made by The Post’s owner, Jeff Bezos, according to the same sources. https://t.co/WC9fovTcvB

— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) October 25, 2024

Publisher Defends Decision Amid Backlash

William Lewis, the new publisher and CEO of the Washington Post, has stood firm on the decision, framing it as a return to the paper’s roots of non-endorsement from 48 years ago which was abandoned to support Democrat Jimmy Carter. In a statement, Lewis explained, “We had it right before that, and this is what we are going back to.”

Lewis emphasized that the decision aligns with the Post’s values and supports readers’ ability to decide independently. He also clarified that the move was made internally, without influence from owner Jeff Bezos, despite speculation to the contrary.

Internal Dissent and Public Criticism

The decision has not only affected readership but has also caused internal turmoil at the Washington Post. Several columnists have resigned in protest, and an opinion piece signed by 20 columnists criticized the decision as a “terrible mistake” and an “abandonment of the fundamental editorial convictions” of the newspaper.

Notable figures such as Watergate journalists Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein have also voiced their disapproval. They stated, “This decision 11 days out from the 2024 presidential election ignores the Washington Post’s own overwhelming reportorial evidence on the threat Donald Trump poses to democracy.”

Wider Implications for Media and Democracy

The controversy surrounding the Washington Post’s decision has reignited debates about the role of media in democracy and the tradition of newspaper endorsements. Some critics view the move as “anticipatory obedience,” suggesting a preemptive concession to potential authoritarianism. Others question whether business interests might be influencing such decisions, particularly given Jeff Bezos’s ownership of the Post.

As the dust settles on this contentious decision, the Washington Post faces the challenge of balancing its commitment to journalistic independence with the expectations of its readership. The outcome of this controversy may well shape the future of political endorsements in American media and the relationship between news organizations and their audiences.