@ I worked in finance. The only people ever mean to me on the phone were millionaires. Under 1 million, super nice. The folks at the very top have egos the size of Jupiter. The size of the sun. They think the entire universe revolves around their ridiculous lives, and when it doesn’t, they can’t handle it. The idea that they are ordinary people just like you and me shatters them.
Why should they care? They’re billionaires. The amount of money lost for 250,000 subscribers verses potentially $10B in government funds is more than worth the trade off.
I cancelled my digital subscription. If the paper fears retaliation and/or is beholden to the whims of a single man, how can I trust their reporting going forward?
You obviously didn't even listen to the message of this podcast. By cancelling, you are being a detriment to your own argument. Less revenue for the paper means less money to pay reporters, which diminishes the voice of the press. Democracy dies in silence.
Newspapers being owned by billionaires is the core issue. People that rich are always entwined with policics becauese of their massive influence and deep pcokets.
Already told my family to not even bother sending me their Amazon wishlists. They will be getting something small and handmade from me. No more Jeff Bezos and I’m saying no to hyper consumerism!!
I’m sure there is a lot of space between “hyper consumerism and amazon” and “small and handmade”. Etsy, etc….Black and white, all or nothing thinking isn’t that radical.
I think it’s not necessarily about punishing the reporters. It’s more of we are sick and tired of the billionaires controlling aspects of our lives and we can cancel them by not giving them our money anymore. We can support media by following people like you guys instead and not feel taken advantage of.
I agree with not shaming people who cancel. Although podcasters like these guys still need newspaper reporters posting stories that they can consume and then podcast about. They even said so in this pod that they rely on the post reporters to be able to do their jobs.
The timing of the decision more than the decision itself or the rationale gives the game away about why Bezos and others are doing this. If Bezos was going to go in this direction it should've been done one of two ways: either make the decision and announce it months ago or you allow the endorsement to go forward and add a note that this will be the final time the paper endorses as we are moving to this new policy and it will be implemented on November 6th.
More so Amazon, imo, as means of production/wealth generation. Both decisions hurt great workers, but at least in CO, job-mkt is strong! Less so for an already gutted journalism industry-
I actually cancelled Amazon Prime earlier this year. The real reason to cancel Prime is that Amazon is a BAD marketplace. It’s genuinely unusable at this point - the searches are useless, it’s flooded with Chinese junk, the ancillary services are duplicative of other things I get.
@@thunderousapplause They literally discuss this. If you don't want to watch it, don't. But do you have to then comment so everybody *knows* that you didn't watch?
I question your rationale on saying people shouldn't cancel their WaPo subscriptions. If a restaurant had great chefs, but the owners had bad social policies, I wouldn't give them my business to preserve the jobs of their chefs. Hobby Lobby has nice products, and I'm sure some fabulous people work there, but they lost my business. What needs to happen is that reporters need to consider changing their source of compensation. People like you are monetizing social platforms. I don't always agree with you, but I still support and listen. The day I see you caving to harmful influences, I'll be gone.
Exactly. Just give the money you would have given to WaPo to NYT, the Atlantic, or NPR instead. Put your journalism dollars into an outfit where the owners don't feel the need to dictate what the news is going to be, and let the journalists move to those outlets.
I think if we collectively decide that we can't punish the employees for the decisions of their employers, that empowers the employers in a terrible, irreparable way. We can always re-sub to WaPo! Do we want to hold our monetary influence hostage (in a way, mind you, that the wealthy never have to worry about) to the idea that we can't 'vote with our feet' because it might punish the line workers? I don't appreciate that responsibility/obligation at all. That's not true support.
Indeed, being a big newspaper doesn't give them a right to people's money. If people think their journalism is going downhill or that Bezos owning the organization has cost the WP its integrity, they have a right to stop paying them. Under the economic model of capitalism, the very system that allows people like Bezos to buy companies like the WP, people should theoretically always have a right to not pay for things they don't want to buy/support, and "Independent journalism" isn't really a good enough reason to tell people they're expected to keep funneling money into the pockets of billionaires with no integrity.
Also if you spend money you would have spent at Hobby Lobby somewhere else, then you're creating jobs elsewhere. Maybe some of the employees don't agree with Hobby Lobby policies but they don't have a choice because they need a job - in that position I'd be very pleased if another craft (or other) outlet expanded and started employing more people and gave me an option to apply for a job with a company more in line with my personal ethos.
15:00 I really need you to understand this- WE’RE NOT THE ONES TAKIKG PAYCHECKS AWAY - BEZOS IS! It was his decision that led people to unsubscribe, not ours. We were fine paying for the coverage. But he has infinite money, and we don’t. He can take the loss if it costs him $90M instead of $77M. It’s a rounding error to him. It’s a basis point. I don’t want my hard-earned money going to him. I want him to feel the reputation hit. Unsubscribing is literally the only move regular people have to make someone like Bezos listen to us. You sound completely tone deaf if you don’t realize that.
I want to say something relevant to BOTH parties that no one ever seems to make....america isnt successful because we have politicians who make plans and policies. Of course those things help. America is successful because of our PEOPLE. productivity, skill, work ethic, innovation...these are major factors in our successes. Neither parties policies work without the actual WORK. Reason I bring this up is I am 56 and disabled. I started working at 12 and at 20 got kicked out of my christian college and my family for "coming out". I lived on the streets going from studying to be a minister to being a literal crack whore. I have dealt with schizophrenia my whole life and at the age of 45 a new psych med nearly killed me and I have been on disability ever since. When Harris announced her first time homebuyers plan I thought "why not". I have never owned my own home. I've either rented or been homeless but from the age of 12 to the age of 45 I never had a food stamp or an unemployment claim or government assistance of any kind. Here is my point I have never asked anyone for anything then I see this dude on Ari Melber saying the other day how Harris' plans will encourage laziness and handouts. Knowing what I just told you does that sound like I am asking for a handout? Or does it look like a goal, an ambition, something that maybe dare I say it I actually worked for and deserve? I am so tired of politicians taking all the credit when things go well and belittling us whenever something is being proposed for us. A disabled 56 year old who literally started paying taxes before I hit puberty and worked my way from street whore to whatever I could do after that to try and handle reality. I already have to watch trump mock disabled people. I live in a trump county in PA and once got called one of the "lazy disabled who wants everything handed to me" when I complained my food assistance went from $192 per month to $19. Apparently I was supposed to shut up and be happy about not being able to afford fresh healthy food any more. I mean seriously...those who aren't disabled think we are looked out for.... cared about....that may be true for some but from MY experience people treat us with a lot of bizarre resentment. Anyway I know this didn't really apply here and was long but tbh i just needed to say it out loud. I'm sick of this crap. Disabled people have to fight for everything in our lives...our health, our home, family and friends who are seemingly always too busy for you, we really don't need the "handout" speeches to never end as well.
If a company does something social unconscionable you must boycott them. The people leaving WaPo are making the right choice... whether a boycott works or not is not the point, and it doesn't matter if they are a generally benevolent company... it's about integrity and not giving any support to things that hurt us. Compromise with insanity has brought us to this point. It's like the other side is saying "we want to shoot you in the face!" and we're like "we don't want to be shot in the face..." and they are like "well, how about the arm? can we shoot you in the arm?" and we're like "we won't want to be shot at all" and then they go "see, they won't compromise..." and then media asks us "why won't you compromise?" -- it's madness.
I think it’s perfectly okay to cancel subscriptions to signal your discontent. Our options with sending a message to billionaires is limited. I do agree with your sentiments that the journalists themselves don’t deserve to be punished, but I’m really not sure what the right balance is.
@consciouspragmatist2778 agreed. Regarding what Jon said it's more about their egos than it is about their money, I think that's a really good point to. On another recent pod they were discussing Elon musk and how one of the reasons he went farther right was the fact that he wants people listening to him and Dems were not just bowing to him for whatever he wants. I agree with you that they want to have influence and power, not just for the bottom line of their business, but so that they can feel powerful and influential
Successful boycotts always risk damage to rank and file employees. What exactly can we ordinary people do to express our anger, other than boycott? Nobody thinks he’ll run an endorsement now, and honestly it wouldn’t matter at this point. That’s not the goal. The goal is to say something. I’m completely fine if newspapers want to stop running endorsements as a policy. Doing it days before the election is a whole different thing.
And I agree in many ways with those suggesting that it's more effective to cancel Prime-- but the "who will be hurt" arguement applies there too. Amazon workers are, in general, paid less than reporters and don't have the option of starting a Substack to replace the lost income.
I am taking an all of the above approach; I do not want to give Bezos any more money in as much as I can help it. I do not want to punish the reporters, and my action as a lone individual is the metaphorical "fart in a hurricane," but with 250,000 people cancelling, it feels more robust than that. My dollars are stretched, and I will give it to organizations where their leadership actually believes in a free press. Bezos did significant damage by nakedly acquiescing to Trump in advance. I don't want WaPo to do exactly what I want, but if I am giving what few extra bucks I have to journalism, it's going to be to those organizations that didn't engage in such a ridiculous stunt so close to the election.
Stop shaming people for canceling their subscriptions. If people dont want to give their money to jeff bezos they shouldnt have to. They are not the ones who have been against a pluralistic democracy for longer than trumpism has been around. During the W Bush years you were either with him or against him. During the Nixon years it was the enemies list. People who cancel their subscription to bezos are not against pluralism. Constantly being comfortable to disagree only works if the other side argues in good faith and doesnt try to make you an enemy that needs to be completely defeated. Centrists like you guys have been negotiating in good faith with people who have been negotiating in bad faith for decades. As a result they keep getting more and more and the overton window continues to shift farther and farther right
But the $ doesn't go to Bezos, it goes to payroll, employee insurance, retirement account pay-ins and operating costs. Cancellations hurt the journalists and the operation of the paper.
For me the is too much conjecture and prediction in news media with so much emphasis on insubstantial click bait events. I wish the balance they saught to achieve was towards the truth, not towards perceived public opinion / party politics.
The reaction to Washington Posts' announcement wasn't about journalism though. It was people trying to exercise their power, as little as they have of it, over a billionaire.
Would've loved to have watched this on Wednesday when it was filmed!! Really frustrating the delayed turnaround times for pods - the opposite to the Bulwark.
I canceled every (there were several) subscription to a Bezos service and I’m not sorry. We are signaling to ALL that we don’t want this capitulation, just as Bezos signaled that it is acceptable to be maneuvered. It may not hurt his wallet, but to those for whom a similar posturing WILL result in financial pain, our anger stands as warning. Might does not make right. The only perception that matters is the perception that Bezos gave to the autocrat that he can be manipulated. We are saying NO.
I REALLY wish you guys had found a way to release up-to-date videos daily, at least in the last 2-3 weeks leading up to the elections. The recording is from 3 days ago, and the news cycle literally changed 50 times since then. While I respect your opinions on Bezos (and definitely would have listened to the whole thing if you had released this on Thursday), I'm now switching to another podcast that's talking about the Ann Selzer poll...
You guys say that the endorsement doesn't matter in the long run, but 250,000 people felt otherwise enough to cancel their subscription. We keep hearing vote with your dollars, then people do and you guys give them a hard time about it. I'm wondering if there is a bias from you two being writers.
Instead of wondering about their bias, what about the apparently 250k people that expect their newspaper to have blatant bias towards a political party. That should really make you wonder.
You guys are discussing this as though it’s just another opinion that I disagree with. You seem to suggest that the billionaire publisher’s act of advance appeasement is the same thing as an opinion piece. WaPo has published many OpEds and covered stories that I didn’t think warranted the attention. None of those led me to even consider canceling my subscription. If we let Bezo’s decision (not the editors) slide without taking any action then we are just as culpable. If this ploy succeeds and we end up with Trump, what possible spine can we expect from the publication in the future? And if Trump loses, how will they cover the inevitable legal circus that ensues?
I cancelled my subscription as well. At this point we've ceded so much power to the billionaires that we simply need them to fix it. If Jeff is as noble as he intended to portray himself to be, he can fund the WaPo as a service to the American system that enriched him. Customer Obsession.
Hi! I was one of the folks that thought you seemed super anxious. But I'm glad you're doing okay and you're managing your anxiety as well as you are. I never listened to the pod until Kamala came into play. Thanks again for all of this! You're doing brave work.
I would cancel my subscription to the Washington Post and subscribe to another outlet like ProPublica. Not because WaPo is choosing not to endorse (I believe that PP doesn't endorse) but because Bezos is indeed displaying anticipatory obedience. That doesn't bode well for WaPo under a Trump term. And if Bezos genuinely believed the media shouldn't endorse any candidate, he would have said it after the last time the Post endorsed. Instead he waited until they had an endorsement ready and then pulled it.
That was a very disappointing discussion of the Bezos signal that there will be no resistance from those who care about more and more money over all else. If Trump is elected, and the paper we know now is gone, which it will be as Bezos has told us, could I cancel my subscription then or will I have to learn to disagree amicably with the facist version of The Washington Post?
Watching media companies try to figure out why people don't trust the media is ĺike watching the people at The Bulwark and The Lincoln Project try to figure out the rise of Trump: it was you! It was f'ing you! They didn't like you! 😂😂😂
seems like most of the problems that WP and NYT create for themselves have to do with the Oped pages and headline writers. Those pundits are seldom right about anything and they don't really add to the paper's news coverage. So why don't they ditch them?
I’ve listened to the first half of this so far, and it’s giving me a different perspective on the WaPo Cancelgate situation (I’m making it a “gate” if it wasn’t already). I’m British and in the UK, and until now my only reaction to the cancelations had been some schadenfreude and glee to “serve him right”, but that’s clearly missing a big part of the picture, and I’m going to re-evaluate my response with some more nuance. Billionaires still seem like a bad idea though.
I love the whole rest of this podcast too, and especially about how to be kind to yourself and give yourself the time and space (and grace) to acclimatise to dealing with the worst case scenario. I remember waking up after the 2016 Brexit referendum vote here and feeling shell-shocked, and literally just bursting into tears (the fact I even went to bed…!) But I then repeated that strategy for our 2017 general election (albeit after a lot longer time awake overnight, and belatedly taking the next work day as holiday because I clearly wasn’t capable to work in that state - and I had been drinking throughout both of these nights)! Apparently the 2019 GE was a blur, but in 2024 I stayed up until the very early hours when the result was called, and went to sleep with the answer at least confirmed and without any nasty surprises to wake up to (and about as pleased as I could be with the results; as a progressive leftist who’s become extremely disillusioned with the two major parties here, over Gaza/Israel and a whole bunch of other policies that are equally important to me, including trans rights… I personally voted Green, and I was most elated about the Green Party co-leader Carla Denyer winning her election in Bristol Central and unseating a Labour stalwart, and for the Green Party in general to quadruple their MP tally to 4! And also very pleased about just how many “safe Labour” majorities had been seriously shaken by the Green candidate, including that of my own constituency [which still went on to elect the current foreign secretary, alas…]) Maybe I should hatch a plan for when to sleep for this one 😅 It’s my birthday today (5th), and like in 2020 I’m hoping for my birthday present to be the result in this election that I’m hoping for, even if it takes a bit longer than my actual birthday to get to! I took my whole birthday week off work in 2020 (I mean, what else was I going to do with that accumulated leave?! 😂), but I’ve been out of work this year since July, so I guess I should probably plan to put some kind of time-based structures around the next week so I don’t descent fully into madness. Loving your work, PSA and beyond - and like I heard someone put it today, remaining “nauseously optimistic” 😂 💙
Then what should happen is that one of the number of billionaires in this country should step up and buy the post from Bezos. Even after all he did positively for the paper he shouldnt own it going forward.
On the topic of stress I am playing a video game non stop and listening to podcasts, wondering how I am going to feel on Wednesday and every other day if the worse part of our country’s inclination wins.
Have you considered that the source of your stress is your obsessing over politics? That maybe half your country isn't evil but just has different opinions? Maybe if you are worried how you feel on Wednesday because of the election, you should spend that time thinking about how to have some meaning in your life that isn't tied to a something as tribal as politics.
@ wow dude maybe you should stop obsessing over how you are and assuming that I think half the country is evil. I don’t. I don’t obsess over politics and bam! We have Trump in the office. I will feel better when he is gone. He brings out the worst in people - case in point - you. Peace my man.
I totally disagree with the choice. But if Bezos wanted to do this why on earth did he wait to do it know. Makes him look that much worse. I don't think he would have gotten anywhere near this amount blow back if he did it earlier. This kinda bs is exactly the point against Trump and oligarchs. Brutal choice. As maxed called it ...participatory obedience.
I didn’t cancel my subscription to the Washington Post, tho I may still in the future if it goes more downhill. Trump wants the Post to fail, so I won’t help him
This conversation about how to hold agency over this moment was exactly what I needed! I call canvass every day before work which energizes me and burns my stress to the ground. Then the sun goes down and the house goes to bed and I build up my stress again with doom scrolling… More agency, less scrolling!
It's wild that we spent so much time reveling at Mark Robinson's foibbles as he posted commentson porn sites..but y'all basically do the same thing by continuing to tweet.
Since the 1790’s. The Federalists and the Republicans (the original political parties, not today’s) had their own newspapers and skewed heavily towards their own views. [Source: “History of Newspapers” by Mitchell Stephens for Collier’s Encyclopedia, New York University, 2008] Also see _Yellow Journalism_ from the late 19th century.
Love all the seething leftists in the comments.. you lot loved him when he benefitted your ideas now hes more neutral you start crying about political interference 😂😂😂😂
As a student of history, I keep myself from catastrophizing a possible Trump dictatorship by reminding myself just how many times he has insulted the military and disrespected some of its most revered generals. There is no scenario in my mind where the Joint Chiefs of Staff would put their hat in the ring for this guy. So there's that.
I am a veteran. The number of service members I met who unashamedly declared they would love to get orders to act against their domestic political opponents or migrants or inner city populations was disturbing (but, hey we're joking bro, don't be a snowflake). There have been numerous studies on white supremacist infiltration of the military and if trump gets himself generals like Flynn, that would be problematic. As someone who served, I would be careful how much faith I would give the military to be the domestic guarantors of democratic pluralism
Pod Save America should remind everybody of the checks and balances that exist in the U.S. which will limit a lot of the things that Trump wants to do if he is elected President. That happened during his 2016-2020 term. That simple fact must alleviate anxiety. But the best solution is not to eff up the landing.
Much of the policies in Project 2025 are geared towards eroding or outright destroying the bureaucracy that kept the former president in check so next time there won’t be very many people telling him no. And SCOTUS has already ruled that whatever the president does as an “official act” (as the Justices will inevitably decide) is immune from criminal prosecution.
Forest Trees. The problem is that a single person controls so much wealth
🧐🧐🧐🧐🧐🧐🧐🧐I’m starting to think billionaires do not have our best interest in mind… 😮😮😮😮😮😮😮😮😮
It's so strange. It's like they don't know that there's more of us, and they only exist by our good grace.
@ I worked in finance. The only people ever mean to me on the phone were millionaires. Under 1 million, super nice. The folks at the very top have egos the size of Jupiter. The size of the sun. They think the entire universe revolves around their ridiculous lives, and when it doesn’t, they can’t handle it. The idea that they are ordinary people just like you and me shatters them.
😂Billionaires never have best interest of people
Why should they care? They’re billionaires. The amount of money lost for 250,000 subscribers verses potentially $10B in government funds is more than worth the trade off.
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
I cancelled my digital subscription. If the paper fears retaliation and/or is beholden to the whims of a single man, how can I trust their reporting going forward?
You obviously didn't even listen to the message of this podcast. By cancelling, you are being a detriment to your own argument. Less revenue for the paper means less money to pay reporters, which diminishes the voice of the press. Democracy dies in silence.
Newspapers being owned by billionaires is the core issue. People that rich are always entwined with policics becauese of their massive influence and deep pcokets.
Exactly this! Bezos interfering does way more to erode trust in media than a presidential endorsement
Already told my family to not even bother sending me their Amazon wishlists. They will be getting something small and handmade from me. No more Jeff Bezos and I’m saying no to hyper consumerism!!
I’m sure there is a lot of space between “hyper consumerism and amazon” and “small and handmade”. Etsy, etc….Black and white, all or nothing thinking isn’t that radical.
So you were a consumerist dog when he was a leftists? Thanks for admitting that lass 😂
I think it’s not necessarily about punishing the reporters. It’s more of we are sick and tired of the billionaires controlling aspects of our lives and we can cancel them by not giving them our money anymore. We can support media by following people like you guys instead and not feel taken advantage of.
I agree with not shaming people who cancel. Although podcasters like these guys still need newspaper reporters posting stories that they can consume and then podcast about. They even said so in this pod that they rely on the post reporters to be able to do their jobs.
Consider cancelling your Amazon subscription and/or buying less on Amazon.
The timing of the decision more than the decision itself or the rationale gives the game away about why Bezos and others are doing this. If Bezos was going to go in this direction it should've been done one of two ways: either make the decision and announce it months ago or you allow the endorsement to go forward and add a note that this will be the final time the paper endorses as we are moving to this new policy and it will be implemented on November 6th.
Just because Bezos is not heard doesn’t mean he is for democracy, his actions however, does speak volumes.
If you cancel the post you should cancel your amazon account.
More so Amazon, imo, as means of production/wealth generation. Both decisions hurt great workers, but at least in CO, job-mkt is strong! Less so for an already gutted journalism industry-
hey PSA, how about you put your money where your mouth is and stop advertising the Washington Post? Stop it. You're losing credibility, man.
I did. Amazon Prime, Kindle, Alexa, Amazon Music, Fire TV. I had no idea how deep I was in.
I actually cancelled Amazon Prime earlier this year. The real reason to cancel Prime is that Amazon is a BAD marketplace. It’s genuinely unusable at this point - the searches are useless, it’s flooded with Chinese junk, the ancillary services are duplicative of other things I get.
@@thunderousapplause They literally discuss this. If you don't want to watch it, don't. But do you have to then comment so everybody *knows* that you didn't watch?
I question your rationale on saying people shouldn't cancel their WaPo subscriptions. If a restaurant had great chefs, but the owners had bad social policies, I wouldn't give them my business to preserve the jobs of their chefs. Hobby Lobby has nice products, and I'm sure some fabulous people work there, but they lost my business. What needs to happen is that reporters need to consider changing their source of compensation. People like you are monetizing social platforms. I don't always agree with you, but I still support and listen. The day I see you caving to harmful influences, I'll be gone.
Exactly. Just give the money you would have given to WaPo to NYT, the Atlantic, or NPR instead. Put your journalism dollars into an outfit where the owners don't feel the need to dictate what the news is going to be, and let the journalists move to those outlets.
I think if we collectively decide that we can't punish the employees for the decisions of their employers, that empowers the employers in a terrible, irreparable way. We can always re-sub to WaPo! Do we want to hold our monetary influence hostage (in a way, mind you, that the wealthy never have to worry about) to the idea that we can't 'vote with our feet' because it might punish the line workers? I don't appreciate that responsibility/obligation at all. That's not true support.
Indeed, being a big newspaper doesn't give them a right to people's money. If people think their journalism is going downhill or that Bezos owning the organization has cost the WP its integrity, they have a right to stop paying them. Under the economic model of capitalism, the very system that allows people like Bezos to buy companies like the WP, people should theoretically always have a right to not pay for things they don't want to buy/support, and "Independent journalism" isn't really a good enough reason to tell people they're expected to keep funneling money into the pockets of billionaires with no integrity.
@@darsyniaTHIS is 💯
Also if you spend money you would have spent at Hobby Lobby somewhere else, then you're creating jobs elsewhere. Maybe some of the employees don't agree with Hobby Lobby policies but they don't have a choice because they need a job - in that position I'd be very pleased if another craft (or other) outlet expanded and started employing more people and gave me an option to apply for a job with a company more in line with my personal ethos.
15:00 I really need you to understand this-
WE’RE NOT THE ONES TAKIKG PAYCHECKS AWAY - BEZOS IS!
It was his decision that led people to unsubscribe, not ours. We were fine paying for the coverage. But he has infinite money, and we don’t. He can take the loss if it costs him $90M instead of $77M. It’s a rounding error to him. It’s a basis point.
I don’t want my hard-earned money going to him. I want him to feel the reputation hit. Unsubscribing is literally the only move regular people have to make someone like Bezos listen to us. You sound completely tone deaf if you don’t realize that.
I want to say something relevant to BOTH parties that no one ever seems to make....america isnt successful because we have politicians who make plans and policies. Of course those things help. America is successful because of our PEOPLE. productivity, skill, work ethic, innovation...these are major factors in our successes. Neither parties policies work without the actual WORK. Reason I bring this up is I am 56 and disabled. I started working at 12 and at 20 got kicked out of my christian college and my family for "coming out". I lived on the streets going from studying to be a minister to being a literal crack whore. I have dealt with schizophrenia my whole life and at the age of 45 a new psych med nearly killed me and I have been on disability ever since. When Harris announced her first time homebuyers plan I thought "why not". I have never owned my own home. I've either rented or been homeless but from the age of 12 to the age of 45 I never had a food stamp or an unemployment claim or government assistance of any kind. Here is my point I have never asked anyone for anything then I see this dude on Ari Melber saying the other day how Harris' plans will encourage laziness and handouts. Knowing what I just told you does that sound like I am asking for a handout? Or does it look like a goal, an ambition, something that maybe dare I say it I actually worked for and deserve? I am so tired of politicians taking all the credit when things go well and belittling us whenever something is being proposed for us. A disabled 56 year old who literally started paying taxes before I hit puberty and worked my way from street whore to whatever I could do after that to try and handle reality. I already have to watch trump mock disabled people. I live in a trump county in PA and once got called one of the "lazy disabled who wants everything handed to me" when I complained my food assistance went from $192 per month to $19. Apparently I was supposed to shut up and be happy about not being able to afford fresh healthy food any more. I mean seriously...those who aren't disabled think we are looked out for.... cared about....that may be true for some but from MY experience people treat us with a lot of bizarre resentment. Anyway I know this didn't really apply here and was long but tbh i just needed to say it out loud. I'm sick of this crap. Disabled people have to fight for everything in our lives...our health, our home, family and friends who are seemingly always too busy for you, we really don't need the "handout" speeches to never end as well.
I cancelled my WaPo subscription and am proud of doing so. I never used Amazon.
If a company does something social unconscionable you must boycott them. The people leaving WaPo are making the right choice... whether a boycott works or not is not the point, and it doesn't matter if they are a generally benevolent company... it's about integrity and not giving any support to things that hurt us. Compromise with insanity has brought us to this point. It's like the other side is saying "we want to shoot you in the face!" and we're like "we don't want to be shot in the face..." and they are like "well, how about the arm? can we shoot you in the arm?" and we're like "we won't want to be shot at all" and then they go "see, they won't compromise..." and then media asks us "why won't you compromise?" -- it's madness.
THANK YOU FOR COVERING THIS!
I think it’s perfectly okay to cancel subscriptions to signal your discontent. Our options with sending a message to billionaires is limited. I do agree with your sentiments that the journalists themselves don’t deserve to be punished, but I’m really not sure what the right balance is.
I never have ordered one thing from Amazon nor have I ever had a Twitter account. I just couldn’t support companies that treat their employees poorly
Stop telling working people they need to give billionaires money so that other billionaires will be held accountable.
"Billionaires might not understand the value of media in a democracy." No shit. Youre just getting that now?
I think it's more likely that they do understand the value and want the power to influence it to their benefit if they choose.
@consciouspragmatist2778 agreed. Regarding what Jon said it's more about their egos than it is about their money, I think that's a really good point to. On another recent pod they were discussing Elon musk and how one of the reasons he went farther right was the fact that he wants people listening to him and Dems were not just bowing to him for whatever he wants. I agree with you that they want to have influence and power, not just for the bottom line of their business, but so that they can feel powerful and influential
@@cg2642same can be said for Trump himself. Before he decided to seek office he had been a pro-choice liberal.
You guys got this one wrong. The reporters could get jobs elsewhere.
Successful boycotts always risk damage to rank and file employees. What exactly can we ordinary people do to express our anger, other than boycott? Nobody thinks he’ll run an endorsement now, and honestly it wouldn’t matter at this point. That’s not the goal. The goal is to say something.
I’m completely fine if newspapers want to stop running endorsements as a policy. Doing it days before the election is a whole different thing.
And I agree in many ways with those suggesting that it's more effective to cancel Prime-- but the "who will be hurt" arguement applies there too. Amazon workers are, in general, paid less than reporters and don't have the option of starting a Substack to replace the lost income.
I am taking an all of the above approach; I do not want to give Bezos any more money in as much as I can help it.
I do not want to punish the reporters, and my action as a lone individual is the metaphorical "fart in a hurricane," but with 250,000 people cancelling, it feels more robust than that. My dollars are stretched, and I will give it to organizations where their leadership actually believes in a free press. Bezos did significant damage by nakedly acquiescing to Trump in advance. I don't want WaPo to do exactly what I want, but if I am giving what few extra bucks I have to journalism, it's going to be to those organizations that didn't engage in such a ridiculous stunt so close to the election.
Should I shop at Walmart to protect their workers' jobs?
Stop shaming people for canceling their subscriptions. If people dont want to give their money to jeff bezos they shouldnt have to. They are not the ones who have been against a pluralistic democracy for longer than trumpism has been around. During the W Bush years you were either with him or against him. During the Nixon years it was the enemies list. People who cancel their subscription to bezos are not against pluralism. Constantly being comfortable to disagree only works if the other side argues in good faith and doesnt try to make you an enemy that needs to be completely defeated. Centrists like you guys have been negotiating in good faith with people who have been negotiating in bad faith for decades. As a result they keep getting more and more and the overton window continues to shift farther and farther right
But the $ doesn't go to Bezos, it goes to payroll, employee insurance, retirement account pay-ins and operating costs. Cancellations hurt the journalists and the operation of the paper.
They're not centrists
@@amandadeloff4278 sure
For me the is too much conjecture and prediction in news media with so much emphasis on insubstantial click bait events. I wish the balance they saught to achieve was towards the truth, not towards perceived public opinion / party politics.
The reaction to Washington Posts' announcement wasn't about journalism though. It was people trying to exercise their power, as little as they have of it, over a billionaire.
Show him what he does matters financially. Cancel Prime. Close your Amazon accounts. Shop elsewhere online.
Would've loved to have watched this on Wednesday when it was filmed!! Really frustrating the delayed turnaround times for pods - the opposite to the Bulwark.
I canceled every (there were several) subscription to a Bezos service and I’m not sorry. We are signaling to ALL that we don’t want this capitulation, just as Bezos signaled that it is acceptable to be maneuvered. It may not hurt his wallet, but to those for whom a similar posturing WILL result in financial pain, our anger stands as warning. Might does not make right. The only perception that matters is the perception that Bezos gave to the autocrat that he can be manipulated. We are saying NO.
I REALLY wish you guys had found a way to release up-to-date videos daily, at least in the last 2-3 weeks leading up to the elections. The recording is from 3 days ago, and the news cycle literally changed 50 times since then. While I respect your opinions on Bezos (and definitely would have listened to the whole thing if you had released this on Thursday), I'm now switching to another podcast that's talking about the Ann Selzer poll...
Ooh, chill outro music there! I need a 60 minute version of that to calm the nerves!
You guys say that the endorsement doesn't matter in the long run, but 250,000 people felt otherwise enough to cancel their subscription. We keep hearing vote with your dollars, then people do and you guys give them a hard time about it. I'm wondering if there is a bias from you two being writers.
Instead of wondering about their bias, what about the apparently 250k people that expect their newspaper to have blatant bias towards a political party. That should really make you wonder.
You guys are discussing this as though it’s just another opinion that I disagree with. You seem to suggest that the billionaire publisher’s act of advance appeasement is the same thing as an opinion piece. WaPo has published many OpEds and covered stories that I didn’t think warranted the attention. None of those led me to even consider canceling my subscription. If we let Bezo’s decision (not the editors) slide without taking any action then we are just as culpable. If this ploy succeeds and we end up with Trump, what possible spine can we expect from the publication in the future? And if Trump loses, how will they cover the inevitable legal circus that ensues?
I cancelled my subscription as well.
At this point we've ceded so much power to the billionaires that we simply need them to fix it.
If Jeff is as noble as he intended to portray himself to be, he can fund the WaPo as a service to the American system that enriched him.
Customer Obsession.
Intelligent human discussion. You two would make a good team.
Making good on breaking up monopolies would be a start... VOTE and THEN HOLD TO ACCOUNT.
Hi! I was one of the folks that thought you seemed super anxious. But I'm glad you're doing okay and you're managing your anxiety as well as you are. I never listened to the pod until Kamala came into play. Thanks again for all of this! You're doing brave work.
I would cancel my subscription to the Washington Post and subscribe to another outlet like ProPublica. Not because WaPo is choosing not to endorse (I believe that PP doesn't endorse) but because Bezos is indeed displaying anticipatory obedience. That doesn't bode well for WaPo under a Trump term. And if Bezos genuinely believed the media shouldn't endorse any candidate, he would have said it after the last time the Post endorsed. Instead he waited until they had an endorsement ready and then pulled it.
Thank you guys for all that you've been have provided for us.
That was a very disappointing discussion of the Bezos signal that there will be no resistance from those who care about more and more money over all else. If Trump is elected, and the paper we know now is gone, which it will be as Bezos has told us, could I cancel my subscription then or will I have to learn to disagree amicably with the facist version of The Washington Post?
Watching media companies try to figure out why people don't trust the media is ĺike watching the people at The Bulwark and The Lincoln Project try to figure out the rise of Trump: it was you! It was f'ing you! They didn't like you! 😂😂😂
They understand the rise and appeal of Trump very well.
@@fastcanoe105 exactly. Like the head honcho of CBS after the 2016 election laughing about how great Trump is for ratings
? People at The Bulwark were never Trumpers from the start. They're very different from the Lincoln Project folks.
Yeah, that disagreement gave me really strong "dad and dad are fighting" vibes.
Reporters can get new jobs or why even bother-just start a podcast like you guys. Trust has been broken at WAPO. No one, nothing is indispensable.
I just don’t understand what good it is to have “fuck you” money if you don’t use it. And how much is enough? It’s def the second gilded age.
If I earn $1000/week and lose $35 on something, say, on Thursday... how that loss would hit my pocket is how this hits Bezos.
I'd hedge my bets too.. why is my prime order 3 hours late. Do I need to pay for super prime to fix the supply chain for me?!
the reporters can band together and buy a failing paper and make Print Publishing Great Again!
Many of my friends canceled their WaPo as a protest with the intention of resubscribing.
They'll be surprised when they find out it will cost them more to resubscribe than it cost them before.
"He really may not understand the value of media in a democracy"
I like the conversations on crooked media
I canceled my Amazon stuff, kept my new stuff . signed up for Twitter years ago but never used.
Unfortunately it’s like $23 to get The NY Times.
I’d like to know how many Amazon or Amazon Prime members have cancelled.
Blue Origin is still a thing!?
Posted 12 minutes ago, just got the notification. Welp, now I gotta watch.
There's no way Bezos wrote that haha
nah deleting twitter is easy, your audience is not doing political analysis for a living guys - there are other websites that can fill the gap
I can't relate at all to twitter addiction, never used it.
seems like most of the problems that WP and NYT create for themselves have to do with the Oped pages and headline writers. Those pundits are seldom right about anything and they don't really add to the paper's news coverage. So why don't they ditch them?
I’ve listened to the first half of this so far, and it’s giving me a different perspective on the WaPo Cancelgate situation (I’m making it a “gate” if it wasn’t already). I’m British and in the UK, and until now my only reaction to the cancelations had been some schadenfreude and glee to “serve him right”, but that’s clearly missing a big part of the picture, and I’m going to re-evaluate my response with some more nuance. Billionaires still seem like a bad idea though.
I love the whole rest of this podcast too, and especially about how to be kind to yourself and give yourself the time and space (and grace) to acclimatise to dealing with the worst case scenario.
I remember waking up after the 2016 Brexit referendum vote here and feeling shell-shocked, and literally just bursting into tears (the fact I even went to bed…!)
But I then repeated that strategy for our 2017 general election (albeit after a lot longer time awake overnight, and belatedly taking the next work day as holiday because I clearly wasn’t capable to work in that state - and I had been drinking throughout both of these nights)!
Apparently the 2019 GE was a blur, but in 2024 I stayed up until the very early hours when the result was called, and went to sleep with the answer at least confirmed and without any nasty surprises to wake up to (and about as pleased as I could be with the results; as a progressive leftist who’s become extremely disillusioned with the two major parties here, over Gaza/Israel and a whole bunch of other policies that are equally important to me, including trans rights… I personally voted Green, and I was most elated about the Green Party co-leader Carla Denyer winning her election in Bristol Central and unseating a Labour stalwart, and for the Green Party in general to quadruple their MP tally to 4! And also very pleased about just how many “safe Labour” majorities had been seriously shaken by the Green candidate, including that of my own constituency [which still went on to elect the current foreign secretary, alas…])
Maybe I should hatch a plan for when to sleep for this one 😅 It’s my birthday today (5th), and like in 2020 I’m hoping for my birthday present to be the result in this election that I’m hoping for, even if it takes a bit longer than my actual birthday to get to! I took my whole birthday week off work in 2020 (I mean, what else was I going to do with that accumulated leave?! 😂), but I’ve been out of work this year since July, so I guess I should probably plan to put some kind of time-based structures around the next week so I don’t descent fully into madness.
Loving your work, PSA and beyond - and like I heard someone put it today, remaining “nauseously optimistic” 😂 💙
Subscribers understand!!
Then what should happen is that one of the number of billionaires in this country should step up and buy the post from Bezos. Even after all he did positively for the paper he shouldnt own it going forward.
On the topic of stress I am playing a video game non stop and listening to podcasts, wondering how I am going to feel on Wednesday and every other day if the worse part of our country’s inclination wins.
Have you considered that the source of your stress is your obsessing over politics? That maybe half your country isn't evil but just has different opinions? Maybe if you are worried how you feel on Wednesday because of the election, you should spend that time thinking about how to have some meaning in your life that isn't tied to a something as tribal as politics.
@ wow dude maybe you should stop obsessing over how you are and assuming that I think half the country is evil. I don’t. I don’t obsess over politics and bam! We have Trump in the office. I will feel better when he is gone. He brings out the worst in people - case in point - you. Peace my man.
Wouldn't be surprised if he still gets those government contracts even if Harris is elected. Hence the incentives.
Exactly, canceling a Harris endorsement won’t affect his future contracts but not appeasing Trump would.
I totally disagree with the choice. But if Bezos wanted to do this why on earth did he wait to do it know. Makes him look that much worse. I don't think he would have gotten anywhere near this amount blow back if he did it earlier. This kinda bs is exactly the point against Trump and oligarchs. Brutal choice. As maxed called it ...participatory obedience.
They don’t care about you.
I didn’t cancel my subscription to the Washington Post, tho I may still in the future if it goes more downhill. Trump wants the Post to fail, so I won’t help him
You are always behind on the news. By the time you will talk about what I am interested in today it will be old news.
This conversation about how to hold agency over this moment was exactly what I needed! I call canvass every day before work which energizes me and burns my stress to the ground. Then the sun goes down and the house goes to bed and I build up my stress again with doom scrolling… More agency, less scrolling!
I guess they won, some countries are able to return to democracy after a dictatorship, Brazil
It's wild that we spent so much time reveling at Mark Robinson's foibbles as he posted commentson porn sites..but y'all basically do the same thing by continuing to tweet.
Thank You, Gents! I've happily NEVER been an Amazon Account Holder... Thanks for ALL you do... Here's to Democracy! VOTE BLUE!
His argument is nonsense.
Since when should newspapers be partisan and biased?????
Since the 1790’s. The Federalists and the Republicans (the original political parties, not today’s) had their own newspapers and skewed heavily towards their own views. [Source: “History of Newspapers” by Mitchell Stephens for Collier’s Encyclopedia, New York University, 2008] Also see _Yellow Journalism_ from the late 19th century.
Jen Ruben said it much better than you guys, sorry.
Doom - podding
Thank you for the therapy. It's much needed.
Love all the seething leftists in the comments.. you lot loved him when he benefitted your ideas now hes more neutral you start crying about political interference 😂😂😂😂
As a student of history, I keep myself from catastrophizing a possible Trump dictatorship by reminding myself just how many times he has insulted the military and disrespected some of its most revered generals. There is no scenario in my mind where the Joint Chiefs of Staff would put their hat in the ring for this guy. So there's that.
I am a veteran. The number of service members I met who unashamedly declared they would love to get orders to act against their domestic political opponents or migrants or inner city populations was disturbing (but, hey we're joking bro, don't be a snowflake). There have been numerous studies on white supremacist infiltration of the military and if trump gets himself generals like Flynn, that would be problematic. As someone who served, I would be careful how much faith I would give the military to be the domestic guarantors of democratic pluralism
Pod Save America should remind everybody of the checks and balances that exist in the U.S. which will limit a lot of the things that Trump wants to do if he is elected President. That happened during his 2016-2020 term. That simple fact must alleviate anxiety. But the best solution is not to eff up the landing.
Much of the policies in Project 2025 are geared towards eroding or outright destroying the bureaucracy that kept the former president in check so next time there won’t be very many people telling him no. And SCOTUS has already ruled that whatever the president does as an “official act” (as the Justices will inevitably decide) is immune from criminal prosecution.
first