Columnist who stepped down after controversial Bezos op-ed expresses concerns over public's doubt in opinion journalists' integrity
A Fresh Take:
Ruth Marcus, a Washington Post columnist for four decades, recently called it quits over a controversial opinion piece in the paper, owned by Jeff Bezos. She stated her job was to share her thoughts, not what Bezos thought she should think.
Just two days after her resignation, Marcus penned down a piece for The New Yorker, detailing the events that led to her departure and raising concerns about the impact of Bezos' changes on the future of the Post's opinion coverage. The article also revealed a column written by Marcus, which was scrapped by the Post's chief executive and publisher Will Lewis.
Last week, Bezos announced the opinion section would focus on personal liberties and free markets, with opposing viewpoints to be published elsewhere. This decision, reported to have resulted in 75,000 subscribers canceling their subscriptions within 48 hours, led to the resignation of opinion editor David Shipley. Marcus' scrapped piece raised only mild concerns about Bezos' overhaul.
Marcus' scrapped column was deemed below the Post's "high bar" and too speculative, as the impact of Bezos' changes wouldn't be known until a new opinion editor was appointed. When Marcus requested a meeting with Lewis regarding the column's rejection, her request was denied, prompting her resignation.
Marcus called her column "meek to the point of embarrassing" and compared her resignation to a serious blow. The column, she states, neither mentioned Bezos' efforts to curry favor with President Trump nor questioned his motives. Instead, it disagreed with Bezos' decision.
"Running it," she wrote in The New Yorker, "would enhance the Post's credibility, not undermine it." Columnists, she pointed out, owe readers their best judgments on any particular issue, asking subscribers to trust that they aren't being told how to think or what to say, or trimming their sails to stay out of dangerous waters.
"But, once the changes are implemented," she continued, "I fear that readers will no longer be able to rely on such assurances, because Bezos, as I read his message, has told them they can't."
The Post did not respond to a request for comment.
Changes within the Post
In her spiked column, Marcus respectfully disagreed with Bezos, arguing that narrowing the range of acceptable opinions is an unwise course. The column did not personally criticize Bezos but expressed concerns about his new edict.
With the overhauled opinion desk's new mandate, Marcus fears readers will no longer have assurances that columnists will provide their best judgments on any particular issue. She also expresses concerns about the possible influence of Bezos' personal business interests.
Meanwhile, Matt Murray, the Post's executive editor, announced a major newsroom reorganization on the same day as Marcus' resignation. The reorganization aims to meet "all audiences where they are," offering a more diverse range of story formats and a stronger focus. Murray emphasized during a town hall meeting that there would be no editorial interference from the top.
While this might be true, at least for now, Bezos' promise that divergent viewpoints will not be welcome at the Post is already being fulfilled. The new mandate from the billionaire, who in October stated that he is "also a complexifier for The Post," is already causing speculation about the new opinion desk's approach to penned editorial pieces.
As the Post works to reacquire lost subscribers and attract new ones, it risks alienating readers and potentially jeopardizing their trust in the storied publication.
These changes come at a time when faith in news media is at an all-time low. Yet, despite the struggles of news publishers to retain subscribers and increase public trust, their billionaire media owners continue to make changes that could potentially harm credibility.
In October, several papers, including the Post, blocked endorsements of Vice President Kamala Harris for president at the eleventh hour. Since Trump's November victory, Bezos has not shied away from cozying up to the president, with Amazon recently securing the streaming rights to "The Apprentice."
It's not just the Post grappling with these issues. On March 5, a new AI tool at the Los Angeles Times, introduced upon the request of billionaire owner Patrick Soon-Shiong, sympathized with the Ku Klux Klan in an opinion piece. This is another example of a well-known newspaper struggling with managing its opinion section as the news industry faces changes in the technological, media, and political landscapes.
For the Post, winning back subscribers is becoming an increasingly challenging task. While the newsroom remains separate from the opinion section, the Post must work hard to convince readers that this remains the case.
Indeed, being a complexifier proves to be quite the balancing act.
- Despite Jeff Bezos' focus on personal liberties and free markets in the revamped Washington Post opinion section, columnist Ruth Marcus argues that this narrowing of opinion range is unwise and could impact readers' trust in the publication.
- The new mandate of the opinion desk, under Bezos' direction, raises concerns for Marcus about the potential influence of Bezos' personal business interests and the assurance of unbiased judgment from columnists.
- As the Post faces criticism over editorial changes, it also grapples with managing its opinion section in the broader context of the evolving media landscape, with instances like the AI tool at the Los Angeles Times sympathizing with the Ku Klux Klan in an opinion piece illustrating these challenges.
