.png)
.png)
.png)
Should Media Endorse Political Candidates?
Oct. 29, 2024. 5 mins. read.
20 Interactions
Some media and even scientific media take partisan political positions, and this results in a loss of credibility and public trust.
There seems to be a trend where fewer newspapers are endorsing political candidates. This is partly driven by financial pressures within the newspaper industry, as well as a desire to avoid alienating subscribers during politically polarized times.
Tensions have flared up between editorial independence, the influence of big media ownership, and the role of newspapers in political discourse, sparking debates on media ethics, the impact of billionaire ownership on journalism, and the diminishing tradition of newspaper endorsements in U.S. elections.
The decisions by the influential newspapers Los Angeles Times and Washington Post not to endorse a presidential candidate for the 2024 election in the U.S. have resulted in controversies.
The owner of the Los Angeles Times, Patrick Soon-Shiong, blocked the editorial board from endorsing one of the two main candidates, leading to some internal turmoil. He “feared that picking one candidate would only exacerbate the already deep divisions in the country”. The editorial page editor and two other editorial board members resigned in response to this decision by the owner.
“I have no regrets whatsoever,” said Soon-Shiong. “In fact, I think it was exactly the right decision.” It is only with clear and non-partisan information side-by-side,” he added, that “our readers could decide who would be worthy of being President for the next four years.”
Similarly, the Washington Post also chose not to endorse a presidential candidate, which was seen as a shift in their editorial policy. This move was ostensibly to return to being an independent voice, but it led to controversy and critique.
Jeff Bezos’ op-ed
Washington Post owner Jeff Bezos has written an op-ed titled The hard truth: Americans don’t trust the news media.
Bezos addresses the controversy surrounding the newspaper’s decision to stop endorsing presidential candidates. He defends this choice by arguing that such endorsements do not significantly sway election results, and that the Washington Post should instead concentrate on delivering factual, non-partisan content to aid readers in making informed decisions.
Bezos emphasizes his dedication to preventing the newspaper from slipping into irrelevance in an era where less rigorous information sources like podcasts and social media are on the rise.
Lack of credibility
“Most people believe the media is biased,” says Bezos. “Anyone who doesn’t see this is paying scant attention to reality, and those who fight reality lose.”
The perception of bias leads to a loss of credibility, which is not unique to the Washington Post.
“Our brethren newspapers have the same issue,” adds Bezos. “And it’s a problem not only for media, but also for the nation. Many people are turning to off-the-cuff podcasts, inaccurate social media posts and other unverified news sources, which can quickly spread misinformation and deepen divisions. The Washington Post and the New York Times win prizes, but increasingly we talk only to a certain elite. More and more, we talk to ourselves.”
Media and partisan media
In my opinion, the question of whether media should take political positions and endorse political candidates depends on the nature of the media.
There are media, and there are partisan media. That partisan media take political positions and endorse political candidates is perfectly fine with me: this is the very raison d’être of partisan media. But then, media that publish partisan political propaganda and endorse political candidates should not present themselves as objective non-partisan media.
So, do the Los Angeles Times and Washington Post want to be partisan media? I think this is the question, and the owners of both newspapers have answered with a loud and clear ‘no’.
Some readers have canceled their subscriptions in outrage. To me, this means that they don’t want information but partisan propaganda. But it is their choice to make, and there is plenty of openly partisan media outlets that offer the propaganda they crave.
And what about science and technology media like Mindplex?
Last month, Scientific American endorsed one of the two main candidates, leading to steamy debates about whether a scientific magazine should engage in political endorsements. This was the second time in the magazine’s history it endorsed a political candidate (the other was Joe Biden in 2020.)
Critics argue that this could undermine the magazine’s credibility as an objective source of scientific information. Many commentators think that this could alienate readers who expect scientific objectivity over political opinion.
While scientists can be political beings, the institutions of science like journals and magazines should ideally uphold a standard of objectivity to maintain trust in science as an impartial pursuit of truth.
By openly taking a political position and endorsing a political candidate, Scientific American and other scientific media that follow the same route might be perceived as aligning science with a particular political ideology, and lose credibility as a result. The words of Jeff Bezos quoted above come to mind.
But I think there’s an even deeper and more serious danger. If scientific media are perceived as partisan political propaganda outlets, then it is science itself the loses credibility, and the public at large loses trust in science.
After the incident, I’ve stopped reading and paying any attention to Scientific American. What I want from scientific media is, guess what, science. When I want to read political commentaries, I know perfectly well where to find them. And if I want to have some fun laughing at the stupidity of partisan propaganda, I know perfectly well where to find that too.
Let us know your thoughts! Sign up for a Mindplex account now, join our Telegram, or follow us on Twitter.
5 Comments
5 thoughts on “Should Media Endorse Political Candidates?”
News should be about facts, not picking sides When media endorses a candidate, it can feel like they’re pushing an agenda instead of just informing us
🟨 😴 😡 ❌ 🤮 💩
The decision by outlets like the Los Angeles Times and Washington Post to avoid political endorsements highlights the challenge of maintaining editorial independence while avoiding bias. Media, including scientific publications, must uphold objectivity to preserve credibility and ensure trust in their reporting.
🟨 😴 😡 ❌ 🤮 💩
Exactly!
🟨 😴 😡 ❌ 🤮 💩
It's surprising to see big newspapers like the LA Times and Washington Post not endorsing a candidate. It really highlights the tension between ownership control and journalistic independence.
🟨 😴 😡 ❌ 🤮 💩
To me, it is surprising to see other big newspapers that want to pretend neutrality endorsing a candidate. If a big newspaper officially endorses a candidate, then it is not neutral but partisan, and should say so.
🟨 😴 😡 ❌ 🤮 💩