I Trusted Jeff Bezos. The Joke’s on Me.; The New York Times, February 14, 2026

  Lydia Polgreen, The New York Times; I Trusted Jeff Bezos. The Joke’s on Me.

"At the end of the century, a journalism scholar published a fascinating comparative study of regional newspapers in the early 1960s and the late 1990s. “Papers of the 1960s seem naïvely trusting of government, shamelessly boosterish, unembarrassedly hokey and obliging,” Carl Sessions Stepp, the researcher, wrote. Newspapers of the ’90s were “better written, better looking, better organized, more responsible, less sensational, less sexist and racist and more informative and public-spirited.”

This sounds, you might think, salutary for the health of democracy. But it may have been precisely this move, away from deferential stenography and toward fearless investigation, that led to declining trust in the news media. Aggressive, probing and accountability-oriented journalism held up a mirror to American society — and many Americans didn’t like what they saw.

“As news grew more negative and more critical, people had more reason to find journalism distasteful,” the media scholar Michael Schudson wrote in a provocative essay on the problem of assessing trust in journalism. “What people do not like about the media is its implicit or explicit criticism of their heroes or their home teams.” No one, famously, likes the bearer of bad news.

Thinking back to that dinner with Bezos, I realized that something similar had happened. He flattered my chosen profession, reassuring me that it was not a cynical undertaking but something much more noble. He told me, in short, what I wanted to hear — and won my trust. In the intervening years, Bezos has apparently decided that his flattery is better aimed at a very different audience: Donald Trump.

During the 2024 presidential campaign, Bezos notoriously demanded that The Post spike its planned endorsement of Kamala Harris, at great cost to the paper. After the election, he donated $1 million to Trump’s inaugural committee and joined the row of plutocrats at the inauguration. Amazon paid $40 million for the rights to a documentary about Melania Trump, spent tens of millions more to market the movie and donated to Trump’s absurd White House mega-ballroom project. It’s certainly one way to win trust.

The Post’s loss is others’ gain. Its best-known journalists have streamed out the door, joining thriving news organizations like The Atlantic, The Wall Street Journal and The Times. These companies’ success, built on aggressive and independent reporting, makes me wonder whether the hand-wringing about trust is misplaced. In this new gilded age, maybe we should set aside trust and — as Bezos himself once urged — embrace skepticism."

Is Jeff Bezos going to destroy the Washington Post? It sure looks like it; The Guardian, February 2, 2026

 Margaret Sullivan, The Guardian; Is Jeff Bezos going to destroy the Washington Post? It sure looks like it

"The turn began in earnest when Bezos – apparently trying to protect his other commercial interests – spiked the draft of an editorial endorsing Kamala Harris for president. Whatever one thinks about endorsement editorials, the timing was terrible; it was the 11th hour, shortly before the 2024 election.

Unsurprisingly, droves of Post subscribers canceled. They were disgusted by the apparent effort to please Donald Trump at the price of editorial independence.

Later, even more subscribers decamped after Bezos made it clear that he wanted its opinion section to take a sharp right turn. Some of the nation’s best columnists departed, and a fine cartoonist, Ann Telnaes, left after she tried to publish a cartoon depicting Bezos and others of his ilk cozying up to Trump. On the news side, many of the paper’s star reporters and editors left for places like the Atlantic, the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal.

Since then, Bezos only continued down this misbegotten path, with Amazon contributing to the Trump inauguration and putting a ridiculous $40m behind a regrettable Melania Trump documentary that is leaving seats empty in a theater near you."

Post to X from Bloomsbury Editor re 10/9/25 library-themed Letter to the Editor

 Kip Currier: Post to X from my Bloomsbury editor regarding my 10/9/25 library-themed Letter to the Editor:

Thank you, @BloomsburyLU author Kip Currier, for your reasoned and passionate defense of libraries in 2 PA newspapers. Libraries are the bedrock of healthy, equitable communities, and we couldn't be more proud to support libraries and library workers. https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/8750699042164055722/5219361931786295174

Published Letter to the Editor: "Libraries support all of us; we should support them". October 9, 2025

 I am sharing a copy of my library-themed 10/9/25 Letter to the Editor that was published in the print versions and the digital versions of the Oil City (PA) paper The Derrick and the Franklin (PA) Times-Union newspapers in Venango County, Pennsylvania. The two newspapers share the same Monday-Saturday content under their own banners for each city. I wrote my letter in response to a 9/26/25 Letter to the Editor written by a Cranberry (Township) resident (not to be confused with the Cranberry in Butler County); I've copied the writer's letter below, after mine. Note: The typo at the start of the newspapers' copy of my letter was the fault of the paper and was not in the letter I emailed to them.

 

I was pleased that the newspapers did not make any changes to the prose. However, they did alter my web links: rather than including the precise websites within, say, Pew Research or ALA, they only provided the homepage; this may be part of their editorial policy. I provided links to evidence/authoritative data to support my points and research and rebut the assertions of the letter writer.

They also omitted my PhD and JD degrees I'd included after my name in the version I sent to them.

Letters to the Editor at these newspapers are limited to no more than 350 words. My submission was 346 words.

The newspapers unfortunately have a digital paywall that precludes free access to even one newspaper item, but this is the digital link to my letter: https://www.thederrick.com/opinion/letter-libraries-support-all-of-us-we-should-support-them/article_8fe1adc8-1dd5-48bf-9ac7-711dfe14d7fe.html 

LETTER: Libraries support all of us; we should support them

October 9, 2025

 

Editor,

This is in response to the Sept. 26 letter to the editor titled “Tax proposal needs to ‘die’ with the library” by Betty M. Hepler.

The author could not be more wrong or misinformed about the state of American libraries and the value they contribute to our lives and communities: libraries are vital necessities and community anchors in towns and cities throughout this nation. See www.pewresearch.org.

1. Libraries provide information and resources that help to educate citizens at all levels of our communities — from blue collar to white collar workplaces and everything in between. See www.ala.org.

2. Research studies demonstrate that libraries economically benefit businesses that are located nearby. See www.imls.gov.

3. Research data also show that libraries are a good “return on investment” (ROI): for every dollar of support to a library, library users are able to save hundreds of dollars by checking out thousands of books, movies, video games, and more, at no charge. See https://slol.libguides.com.

4. Today’s libraries offer all kinds of life-enhancing activities and services — story time for kids, book discussion groups for teens and seniors, access to free WiFi and computers, and classes and webinars on topics like “where to find jobs,” “starting your own business” and “how to use AI chatbots.” See https://action.everylibrary.org.

5. Libraries have been a foundational part of human life and history for thousands of years. They are essential tools and places that can benefit our lives; enable us to think, learn, and grow from our yesterdays; and fuel our hopes and dreams for better todays and tomorrows.

Libraries continue to change and evolve to better suit and meet our needs, just as humans and societies must change, adapt and evolve in order to survive and thrive.

Each of us knows that we need to take good care of ourselves to live the best lives we can. Let’s take good care of the libraries that support and serve us too. See https://www.ala.org.

Long live the library!

— Kip Currier,

Emlenton

 

 

LETTER: Tax proposal needs to 'die' with the library

• Sep 26, 2025

 

Editor,

I am amazed that we are trying to keep alive a mostly dead memory — the library. We have been propping them up for decades.

The Encyclopedia salesman has lost his job; books are not being sold at the same rate as before, being available on tape or kindle now; libraries and bookstores have fallen to the side of the road.

Wake up! Most things have a time to shine but lose out to progress. Now we are trying to keep alive something that needs to admit its death.

The overburdened taxpayers of this country are having the blame and responsibility thrown on their shoulders.

On the front side, one may think it is a charge of $12.50. But my understanding is the cost is $12.50 per every $50,000 in assessment. All properties, for the most part, have seen a dramatic rise in their assessment; so this is a lot of money for something that is dead.

Let it die!

Turn it into a museum. No more taxes.

— Betty M. Hepler,

Cranberry

Washington Post columnist quits after her opinion piece criticizing owner Jeff Bezos is rejected; The Hill, March 10, 2025

  DAVID BAUDER, ASSOCIATED PRESS VIA THE HILL; Washington Post columnist quits after her opinion piece criticizing owner Jeff Bezos is rejected

"A columnist who has worked at The Washington Post for four decades resigned on Monday after the newspaper’s management decided not to run her commentary critical of owner Jeff Bezos’ new editorial policy.

Ruth Marcus, who has worked at the newspaper since 1984, wrote that “it breaks my heart to conclude that I must leave.” Her resignation letter was first reported by The New York Times.

Her exit is fallout from the billionaire owner’s directive that the Post narrow the topics covered by its opinion section to personal liberties and the free market. The newspaper’s opinions editor, David Shipley, resigned because of the shift, announced two weeks ago.

Marcus said that the Post’s publisher, Will Lewis, declined to publish her column, which she said was “respectfully dissenting” from Bezos’ edict. It was the first time in nearly 20 years of writing columns that she’s had one killed, she said.

The decision “underscores that the traditional freedom of columnists to select the topics they wish to address and say what they think has been dangerously eroded,” she wrote."

Three billionaires: America’s oligarchy is now fully exposed; The Guardian, February 27, 2025

 Robert Reich, The Guardian; Three billionaires: America’s oligarchy is now fully exposed

"One of the unacknowledged advantages of the horrendous era we’ve entered is that it is revealing the putrid connections between great wealth and great power for all to see.

Oligarchs are fully exposed and they are defiant. It’s like hitting the “reveal codes” key on older computers that let you see everything.

On Wednesday, Jeff Bezos, the third-richest person in America, who bought the Washington Post in 2013, announced that the paper’s opinion section would henceforth focus on defending “personal liberties and free markets”.

Anything inconsistent with this view would not be published, according to his statement. “Viewpoints opposing those pillars will be left to be published by others.”

The Post’s opinion editor, David Shipley, promptly resigned, as he should have...

Elon Musk, the richest person in the world, bought Twitter in 2022, laid off everyone who was filtering out hateful crap on the platform, renamed it X and turned it into a cesspool of lies in support of Trump.

Mark Zuckerberg, the second-richest person, has followed suit, allowing Facebook to emit lies, hate and bigotry in support of Trump’s lies, hate and bigotry.

All three of these men were in the first row at Trump’s inauguration. They, and other billionaires, have now exposed themselves for what they are.

They are the oligarchy. They continue to siphon off the wealth of the nation. They are supporting a tyrant who is promising them tax cuts and regulatory rollbacks that will make them even richer.

They are destroying democracy so they won’t have to worry about “parasites” (as Musk calls people who depend on government assistance) demanding anything more from them.

When billionaires take control of our communication channels, it’s not a win for free speech. It’s a win for their billionaire babble."

Jeff Bezos’s Hypocritical Assertion of Power; The Atlantic, February 26, 2025

 Joshua Benton, The Atlantic; 

Jeff Bezos’s Hypocritical Assertion of Power

His decision will only make The Washington Post a weaker institution. 

"But the scale of the hypocrisy on display here is eye-watering, and this decision can only make the Post a weaker institution.

Let’s get the motivation out of the way. This is the same Jeff Bezos who decided to cancel the Post’s endorsement of Kamala Harris just before the election—a move that led more than 250,000 paying Post readers to cancel their subscriptions within days. The same Bezos who flew to Mar-a-Lago to cozy up to Donald Trump after the election. The same Bezos whose Amazon donated $1 million to Trump’s inauguration fund and paid $40 million for a Melania Trump documentary—the most it had ever paid for a doc, nearly three times what any other studio offered, and more than 70 percent of whichwill go directly into Trump’s pockets. All of that cash seems to have served as a sort of personal seat license for Bezos, earning him a spot right behind the president at the inauguration. The tech aristocracy’s rightward turn is by now a familiar theme of the postelection period, and it doesn’t take much brain power to see today’s announcement as part of the same shift."

Dying in Darkness: Jeff Bezos Turns Out the Lights in the Washington Post’s Opinion Section; Politico, February 26, 2025

 MICHAEL SCHAFFER , Politico; Dying in Darkness: Jeff Bezos Turns Out the Lights in the Washington Post’s Opinion Section

"In personally announcing that he was dramatically re-orienting the editorial line, and in fact wouldn’t even run dissenting views, Bezos added another sharp example to a narrative that represents a grave threat to the Post’s image: The idea that its owner is messing around with the product in order to curry favor with his new pal Donald Trump, who has the power to withhold contracts from Amazon and other Bezos companies.

The paper’s image is not some abstract question for journalism-school professors. It’s a matter of dollars and cents. If readers don’t trust a publication’s name, no amount of Pulitzer-worthy scoops will fix it. For Bezos, a guy who believes that the Post needs to gain a broad-based audience, it’s a baffling blind spot...

Owners may get the final say at publications they own, but the wisest among them have let their newsrooms and editorial boards make their own decisions without fear or favor. That’s to prevent the very impression that Bezos is making — that of a mogul trying to disguise his own predilections as independent thought...

Yet even as leadership talked about amping up readership, the owner personally alienated real and potential readers: first by spiking the endorsement, then by showing up in the line of moguls at Trump’s inauguration and now by declaring that the publication would have one editorial line for all of its contributors. It all made his publication look wimpy, or possibly corrupt.

Instead of being an occasionally fussy repository of mostly mainstream points of view, the venerable publication’s opinion pages now risk looking like a vessel for a very rich owner to curry favor with the man who runs the government. It’s going to be hard to keep that image from sticking to the whole organization — including the non-wimpy, non-corrupt reporting corps that keep digging up scoops on the administration.

Bezos, of all people, should know this: He’s the branding whiz who came up with “Democracy Dies in Darkness.”

Among many journalists, Wednesday’s bombshell announcement is being debated as a matter of media ethics: Was Bezos within his rights as an owner to call the tune on opinion matters? Or was this type of process meddling a violation of norms that go back at least to the 1950s?...

“I am of America and for America, and proud to be so,” he added. “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.”

Sounds good late at night in the dorm room. But does said freedom include, say, the freedom to start a union at an Amazon warehouse? Or run a business without worrying that some monopolistic e-commerce behemoth is going to drive you under? Come to think of it, these sound like great subjects for energetic debate on a pluralistic op-ed page somewhere. Too bad Bezos, instead of embracing the great American history of arguing about freedom, announced that he’s not so keen on debate."

Jeff Bezos is muzzling the Washington Post’s opinion section. That’s a death knell; The Guardian, February 26, 2025

 Margaret Sullivan, The Guardian ; Jeff Bezos is muzzling the Washington Post’s opinion section. That’s a death knell

"Owners and publishers of news organizations often exert their will on opinion sections. It would be naive to think otherwise.

But a draconian announcement this week by Jeff Bezos, the Washington Postowner, goes far beyond the norm.

The billionaire declared that only opinions that support “personal liberties” and “free markets” will be welcome in the opinion pages of the Post.

“Viewpoints opposing those pillars will be left to be published by others,” he added.

The paper’s top opinion editor, David Shipley, couldn’t get on board with those restrictions. He immediately – and appropriately – resigned.

Especially in the light of the billionaire’s other blatant efforts to cozy up to Donald Trump, Bezos’s move is more than a gut punch; it’s more like a death knell for the once-great news organization he bought in 2013...

What is clear is that Bezos no longer wants to own an independent news organization. He wants a megaphone and a political tool that will benefit his own commercial interests.

It’s appalling. And, if you care about the role of the press in America’s democracy, it’s tragic.

“What Bezos is doing today runs counter to what he said, and actually practiced, during my tenure at the Post,” Martin Baron, the paper’s executive editor until 2021 and the author of the 2023 memoir Collision of Power: Trump, Bezos and the Washington Post, told me in an email Wednesday.

“I have always been grateful for how he stood up for the Post and an independent press against Trump’s constant threats to his business interest,” Baron said. “Now, I couldn’t be more sad and disgusted.”...

This outrageous move will enrage them. I foresee a mass subscriber defection from an outlet already deep in red ink; that must be something businessman Bezos is willing to live with.

He must also be willing to live with hypocrisy.

“Bezos argues for personal liberties. But his news organization now will forbid views other than his own in its opinion section,” Baron pointed out, recalling that it was only weeks ago when the Post described itself in an internal mission statement as intended for “all of America”.

“Now,” Baron noted, “its opinion pages will be open to only some of America, those who think exactly as he does.”

It’s all about getting on board with Trump, to whose inauguration Bezos – through Amazon, the company he co-founded – contributed a million dollars. That allowed him a prime seat, along with others of his oligarchical ilk."

Post owner Bezos announces shift in opinions section; Shipley to leave; The Washington Post, February 26, 2025

 Washington Post staff , The Washington Post; Post owner Bezos announces shift in opinions section; Shipley to leave

"What readers are saying

The comments express strong disapproval of The Washington Post's new focus on "personal liberties and free markets" in its opinion section. Many readers perceive this shift as a move towards right-wing ideology and a departure from the paper's tradition of diverse and critical opinion pieces. There is a widespread sentiment that this change undermines journalistic integrity and stifles free speech, leading numerous subscribers to cancel their subscriptions in protest. Show less

This summary is AI-generated. AI can make mistakes and this summary is not a replacement for reading the comments."

How Jeff Bezos can stop the bleeding at the Washington Post; The Guardian, January 17, 2025

 Margaret Sullivan , The Guardian; How Jeff Bezos can stop the bleeding at the Washington Post

"More than 400 newsroom staffers at the Washington Post pleaded with the paper’s owner, Jeff Bezos, this week to do something about their beloved paper’s rapid – and very public – decline.

“We are deeply alarmed by recent leadership decisions that have led readers to question the integrity of this institution, broken with a tradition of transparency, and prompted some of our most distinguished colleagues to leave, with more departures imminent,” an extraordinary letter to Bezos read in part, as first reported by NPR’s David Folkenflik. It was signed by some of the Post’s most respected names, including the investigative reporter Carol Leonnig and the unofficial dean of DC politics writers Dan Balz.

I feel their pain and join their cause. I was proud to work at the Washington Post for six years, until 2022, as the paper’s media columnist. My ties to the paper go back much further; it was the Post’s Watergate reporting that piqued my interest, as a teenager, in journalism and (along with a whole generation of other young people) drew me into a lifelong career. I know and admire many reporters, editors, photographers, videographers, designers and others at the paper, and doubt I’ll ever give up my subscription...

Bezos may not care. The billionaire who bought the paper for $250m in 2013 has been in supplication mode to Donald Trump for months. One of the world’s richest individuals, Bezos seems more interested in palling around with the likes of fellow billionaire Elon Musk.

But let’s say he does care, for reasons that may span the spectrum from preserving his own place in history to defending press rights to improving the Post’s red-drenched bottom line.

What could he do, immediately, to stem the bleeding?

First, he should show up – soon – to hold a town hall with the newsroom, answer questions and take the heat. Do it on the record...

Second, he should clearly state – publicly – that he understands the importance of editorial freedom and pledge not to interfere with it. And he should communicate that he gets the importance of the Post’s history and mission, and that he will support it.

Third, he should dump his handpicked publisher, Will Lewis, from whom many of these problems originate. Lewis, a British journalist who hails from the world of Rupert Murdoch, is far from a paragon of journalistic excellence or good judgment. His appointment has been rejected by the body of the Post (and, eventually, by its readers); to put it mildly, the graft didn’t take. Recognizing that, and immediately beginning a search for a more suitable replacement, would be a huge – and essential – step in the right direction.

All of this should be transparent to the public, in keeping with how the Post has conducted itself for many years. It’s a core value."

The Backstory: Paywalls and the ethics of charging for news content; The San Diego Union-Tribune, February 26, 2022

FOR SUBSCRIBERS, The San Diego Union-Tribune; The Backstory: Paywalls and the ethics of charging for news content

[Kip Currier: Not a joke...This story -- 

The Backstory: Paywalls and the ethics of charging for news content --

is only available to subscribers.

Hey, San Diego Union-Tribune, you might want to think about making a piece about the ethics of paywalls accessible to non-subscribers too. You might actually persuade some people to your viewpoint and generate some worthwhile conversation about the pros and cons of paywalls. 

Bad editorial and marketing decisions, as subscriptions to many newspapers continue to decrease and local news coverage is increasingly endangered.]

Public deserves open access; Daily Press, June 10, 2017

Marisa Porto, Daily Press; Public deserves open access

"American writer Walter Lippman once wrote, "The best servants of the people, like the best valets, must whisper unpleasant truths in the master's ear."

His quote describes perfectly the mission of a newspaper and its staff.

That mission remains at the heart of why Americans should be concerned about the state of the Freedom of Information Act around this nation.

This year alone, journalists from my news organization have filed dozens of FOIA requests. The topics they asked about ranged from bus accidents to crime statistics to how millions of dollars of taxpayer money was spent on a private business venture at our local airport. The last request sparked a statewide investigation, prompted a change in state law and has caused the firing of the airport director and the resignation of one top city official — so far...

Playwright Arthur Miller once said, "A good newspaper, I suppose, is a nation talking to itself."

Let's keep the conversation going."

John Oliver’s newspaper rant hits a nerve: “We’ve watched it being not-so-slowly destroyed by forces beyond our control”; Salon, 8/10/16

Scott Timberg, Salon; John Oliver’s newspaper rant hits a nerve: “We’ve watched it being not-so-slowly destroyed by forces beyond our control” :

"So part of what’s interesting about Oliver’s bit — which looked at both the causes of the decline as well as the effects, with his usual combination of hyperventilating moralism and comic exaggeration — is that some seem frustrated with it. And not just people who hate the press, but people who value what it does.

The most visible of these criticisms so far has come from the president of the Newspaper Association of America, who praised the segment’s opening. “But making fun of experiments,” David Chavern wrote, “and pining away for days when classified ads and near-monopolistic positions in local ad markets funded journalism is pointless and ultimately harmful.”

Sullivan, who was once the executive editor of the Buffalo News and the public editor of the New York Times, hit back sharply in a Post piece:

Actually, no. What Oliver did was precisely nail everything that’s been happening in the industry that Chavern represents: The shrinking staffs, the abandonment of important beats, the love of click bait over substance, the deadly loss of ad revenue, the truly bad ideas that have come to the surface out of desperation, the persistent failures to serve the reading public."

Young People Frequent Libraries, Study Finds; New York Times, 10/22/12

Christine Haughney, New York Times; Young People Frequent Libraries, Study Finds: "But in troubling news for tablet makers, the study also found that the subjects under 30 who read electronically were more likely to read books on a cellphone or a computer. In fact, the study found that 41 percent of readers under 30 view books using a cellphone and 55 percent read from a computer. Only 23 percent of Americans under 30 used an e-reader and 16 percent used a tablet."