25 Comments

It’s not the institutions. The institutions are dead. Try as they might, the people who still work in them can’t in good faith claim to be working for a cause. Unless they are in total denial, they are just working for a paycheck. It’s the billionaire owners who are advancing autocracy because believe they will fair well under one. What they fail to understand is that there aren’t enough favors for all of them to curry. The limited spoils will go to whoever gets there first and sucks up the most. And if they do something to piss off the idiot king, the revenge will be brutal. They may be the richest but they are clearly not the best and the brightest. And we all pay for their greed and stupidity.

Expand full comment

Institutions never are the safeguard. As our Constitution says in its Preamble, it is us.

Always us.

Expand full comment

So let's do it.

Expand full comment

Doing my best, Becky. I'm sure you are too. We Americans have to trust in one another, and if we do, we will prevail. There have always been monarchists among us, and there have always been people who sat on the sidelines. But as long as the fire of our Founding burns in the bones of enough of us, we will prevail.

Expand full comment

This is all the doing of FOX News. FOX News and its lesser imitators like OANN, Newsmax, etc. That collectively and ongoingly convince 40% of the American people that Trump's lies are actually truth, that enraged a crowd of 10,000 to sack the Capitol. That Haitian immigrants are eating people's pets.

Until and unless FOX et al can be convinced--or legally forced--to not endlessly lie, or at least tell some semblance of the truth, our democracy will fall to dictatorship or another civil war.

Oligarchs like Bezos caving to Trump a week before the election is merely a symptom of FOX's corrosive handiwork.

Expand full comment

I have to say... the people that are fooled by Fox *want* to be fooled. They saw that the network had to pay the better part of a billion dollars for systematically lying to them about Dominion Voting. They've seen conspiracy theory after conspiracy theory, from Iraqi WMDs to Joe Biden's dealings with Ukraine implode on impact with reality.

So, yes, Fox is responsible, as are the others, for the degradation of American democracy. But their viewers are not innocent.

Expand full comment

You're spot on! Bringing the 40% of Americans who live in the MAGA universe back to reality will not be easy. But for the good of the country it must be done.

Expand full comment

Hire a Tory to be decision maker and you get a monarchist

Expand full comment

Agreeing, but noting that the order apparently came from Bezos.

Bezos is not a Tory, just a weenie scared that Trump might geld his rockets.

Expand full comment

"But the billionaire owners are (intentionally or not) sending a signal to the newsrooms: Prepare to accommodate your coverage to a Trump regime"

Actually, the oligarchs are sending a strong and unambiguous to tRump: We value tax cuts and minimal regulation far more than a democratic country, so we're really on your team.

Expand full comment
Oct 26Edited

Mr. Froomkin, it was through the WaPo years ago that I first began reading your insightful analyses. It is indeed sickening to see how that once-great institution has now bent the knee to the would-be American Hitler. The most damning (and accurate) observation is: "That these institutions are not just succumbing to authoritarianism, they are advancing it."

I have no regrets about canceling my WaPo subscription. That is no longer a news outlet that can be trusted.

Expand full comment

Thank you for this post. There's not much to add to what you and Margaret Sullivan have written. It was a punch in the gut when I first read the news yesterday. Bezos is a greedy, mf coward, as is Musk, many of the so-called republican leaders, and on and on and on . . .

Expand full comment

Totally outrageous! Well put.! Great writing ! Thank you for calling out the no back bone, kissing the ring, or more?

Expand full comment

I was actually surprised to see that a number of the opinion writers expressed their displeasure very publicly.Ruth Marcus, Karen Tumulty, Perry Bacon Jr., and Ann Telnaes have been quite open, and the paper chose to publish those comments. Readers have been vocal in opposing and in canceling their subscriptions.

I don't want to diminish the importance of a powerful oligarch bending the knee to the wannabe tyrant. But sometimes we make too much of the power of the rich. ordinary people get a vote, too, and not just at the ballot box. It is our labor and ideas that make them rich and powerful. When we withhold those, and our money, their power collapses. Not immediately and not easily. But inevitably.

Your readers, Dan, are voting against the corruption of media by voting with their dollars to amplify your voice. The will and the personal sacrifices of The People are the only reason we haven't slipped into tyranny already.

Expand full comment

Withholding our money is the “vote with our dollars” part, an almost immediate power we often forget we have. We don’t have to wait for an election to use it. We have three months before the next inauguration and could be using this time to make sure that the oligarchy understands our anger in the only way they seem able.

A bonus to an Amazon boycott- aren’t all of those boxes made by Koch/ GeorgiaPacific? Or is it Uihlein? Either way it’s a win.

Expand full comment

In one fell swoop Bezos destroyed the credibility of the Washington Post, which was once a great institution. Offhand I cannot recall a more striking example of a business mogul being willing to kill off one part of his empire if it could hurt the other parts. Spare me any blather about a public service, independent voice, etc. RIP WaPo.

Expand full comment

Since you were there during watergate how did you feel when the post did not endorse a presidential candidate in 1988? What does endorsing a candidate have to do with objective journalism, as Martin baron described the goal of a newspaper as being? Maybe it’s time for all newspapers to stop endorsing political candidates and parties and instead just report their campaign platforms and policy statements so people can make an informed choice. Endorsements have always had a ring of big brother cult of personality to me anyway to tell the truth. Remember it was Jeff bezos personal passion that saved the Washington post, not Amazon, Jeff bezos. Jeff bezos per Martin baron is not political, so following the LA Times, if that’s what happened, I don’t know, was probably the right thing to do.

Expand full comment

Journalist were paid to use their skills for the news papers. Trump taught oligarchs that employees can be pressured to misuse their skills, some will leave but many will submit. The ones who submit will be used to do immoral or illegal things and they will suffer the consequences, while the oligarchs escape the consequences and may even benefit.

Expand full comment

The LA Times and WAPO skewed public understanding of what is at stake by (in effect) equating Trump’s significant legal and ethical breaches with Kamala Harris’ handling of policy challenges. But, consider what Lee Rood ( a Des Moines Register columnist) wrote on her personal FB page pointing out separation between news and editorial divisions and need to keep subscriptions to support writers in those papers

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid02HxLf4g6Bw8TsBu1VPKRz2CBtmxaTdV1TXiUnhj6FatrqeRNsHVE2SVk7YmrVxbsDl&id=1083046722

Expand full comment

“Every self-respecting journalist on both the news and opinion sides should be sounding the alarm about a possible second term for Trump. He poses a threat to democracy and the free press. On the news side, that requires brutally honest coverage of the threats Trump presents, with no false equating of the two parties — one of which has rejected reality and democratic values.” Are you out of your mind? Which one has “rejected reality and democratic values,” pray tell? If it’s not the Democrats, I can’t imagine who you mean. What kind of democracy condones, supports and supplies bombs for a genocide? Oh, right, BOTH parties. The slaughter in Israel is enough to get neither candidate one vote. As for WaPo not endorsing Harris, that’s a good thing because she (The Dems) insists on censorship. How do you feel about that? The Republicans, for all their faults, are for keeping the First Amendment, which Harris/Walz call, “dangerous.” Harris has NO moral core or code that she expresses. In fact, her answer to any question comes of as inane…she has no concept of the words, “yes” or “no,” and can’t utter them. Her go-to place is to mention “grocery prices,” “women’s bodies,” and how Trump admires dictators. That’s it. All she’s got. No foreign policy except to follow Biden’s insanity, no diplomacy in sight to make peace with other countries, no plan for healthcare and education for all (you know, like Russia, China, Cuba, et.al.), no thoughts on eliminating homelessness, no domestic economic plans for reindustrialization here at home to create jobs, no thoughts about forcing big pharma, big agriculture, big military to mend their mendaciousness. Worse, she happily accepted the endorsement of the likes of the Cheneys, Kagans, Clintons, and their warmongering ilk, plus the “Elites.” She’s simply awful, and you rag on a newspaper who won’t endorse her? Besides, it’s not the place of newspapers to endorse anyone. It’s their place to present facts. Period. The citizens can decide for themselves. BTW, Trump has TWO great assets she doesn’t: Kennedy and Gabbard, two honest, intelligent people who will be in Trump’s ear. If he’s elected, his cabinet won’t be the warmongers he listened to last time around. It will be people who want people to be heathy and reject the dictates of the food/farms industries that are poisoning our children, who are the unhealthiest in the world.

Expand full comment

Rob Roy asks "Which [political party] has 'rejected reality and democratic values,' pray tell?"

Could it be the one where the vice president of a former president has said he "cannot in good conscience support him"? The one where the former Chief of Staff and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs have called that former president a "fascist"? The former president whose then- Secretary of Defense has called "a threat to democracy."? The former president most of whose cabinet officials and numerous aides have refused to endorse?

And reality denial. Could it be the former president who still denies he lost the last election even though the courts have said he did, denies that he raped a woman that the court says he did, (and on and on)?

This is really, really hard. It could take me more than a femtosecond to see the difference between usual brutality of Great Powers this.

But not more than a picosecond.

Expand full comment

I don't think you read the facts I mentioned. The "threat to democracy" is censorship. Besides, what you say and what I say will make no difference when the BRICS de-dollarize the Global South, skipping SWIFTS, using their own currencies and freeing the majority of the world from the road rage sanctions of the US and its sycophants and unites to breathe free in cooperation, and mutual respect with equality for all. Now, THAT'S democracy. No more "world order" of the US that gives orders and punishes for disobedience. Most people have no idea of how wonderful it is to live in Russia or China. As Huxley said, "People who don't travel don't know anything."

Expand full comment

Rob Roy says " The threat to democracy" is censorship.'"

Oh, you mean like Trump calling the press "the enemy of the people"? Saying that he'll turn the Department of Justice against CBS and ABC? Encouraging crowds to attack reporters? The kind of stuff that has led Reporters Without Borders to calling Trum an "existential threat to press freedom"? rsf.org/en/usa-trump-verbally-attacked-media-more-100-times-run-election

"Most people have no idea of how wonderful it is to live in Russia or China."

Yeah, you know, speaking about genocide, Ukraine, Tibet, and the Uighurs would like to have a word about that. Hong Kong would like a moment as well.

Expand full comment

Woe, indeed.

Expand full comment

Does it also mean that they've come to believe odds are in his favor?

Expand full comment