home.social

#mattmurray — Public Fediverse posts

Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #mattmurray, aggregated by home.social.

  1. The Washington Post is gutting its books coverage – Literary Hub

    The Washington Post is gutting its books coverage.

    By Brittany Allen, February 4, 2026

    Earlier today, Jeff Bezos’ Washington Post laid off hundreds of its employees, in what one staffer called “an absolute bloodbath.”

    As The Guardian reported this morning, editor-in-chief Matt Murray told his masthead that the paper was due for a “strategic reset.” Citing flagging subscriptions and grim growth, Murray announced that the Post would be laying off a third of its workforce, and sundowning several popular sections—including the sports desk, the daily news podcast, most of the “international reporting operation,” some local coverage, and the books desk.

    Going forward, the paper will pivot to prioritizing news concerning “national security,” and topics like science, health, medicine, technology, climate and business.

    The Post’s book coverage—chiefly via the beloved Book World section—has long been a gold standard in the industry. Critics like John Williams, Becca Rothfeld, Jacob Brogan, Michael Dirda, and Ron Charles have shaped the literary landscape. For decades, in some cases.

    Book World originated in the aftermath of Watergate. In a fond 2022 reflection, editor Dirda described the section’s early days, during which he nurtured and commissioned many literary greats—like the polymath Guy Davenport, the novelist Angela Carter, and David Remnick, who’d go on to edit The New Yorker.

    It’s critical voices like these who will be first affected by the section’s sunsetting. But authors and publishers should also worry about what the end of Book World means for national press.

    At least Charles, who learned of his firing while eating “eating one of the two remaining Harry & David pears that the Post sent to celebrate [his] 20th anniversary at the paper,” is determined not to go gentle. He is starting a Substack.

    In his first missive to readers, the unleashed critic quipped: “Honestly, the worst aspect of this impoverishing, family-wrecking, confidence-crushing ordeal is that it will inspire David Brooks to write an essay about the hubris of American media.”

    Meanwhile, the paper’s long term strategy remains unclear. As the Times reported, the Post is “far from alone” in the battle to stay relevant in a downward-trending media ecosystem whose traffic is increasingly threatened by AI summaries. But it is possibly the only outlet where the bottom line is meaningless, given the owner is richer than Satan.

    Bezos, whose personal wealth is estimated at $261 billion, could not be reached for comment about any of the cuts his team architected.

    Post employees who have been laid off will continue to be on staff through mid-April, though “they will not be required to work.” Health insurance coverage will continue for six months.

    A union-led protest to denounce the cuts is scheduled for tomorrow.

    Continue/Read Original Article Here: Literary Hub » The Washington Post is gutting its books coverage.

    Tags: Book Reviews, Book World, Books, Critics, Editorial Pivot, Journalists, Literary Hub, Matt Murray, National Newspapers, The Washington Post
    #BookReviews #BookWorld #Books #Critics #EditorialPivot #Journalists #LiteraryHub #MattMurray #NationalNewspapers #TheWashingtonPost
  2. The Washington Post is gutting its books coverage – Literary Hub

    The Washington Post is gutting its books coverage.

    By Brittany Allen, February 4, 2026

    Earlier today, Jeff Bezos’ Washington Post laid off hundreds of its employees, in what one staffer called “an absolute bloodbath.”

    As The Guardian reported this morning, editor-in-chief Matt Murray told his masthead that the paper was due for a “strategic reset.” Citing flagging subscriptions and grim growth, Murray announced that the Post would be laying off a third of its workforce, and sundowning several popular sections—including the sports desk, the daily news podcast, most of the “international reporting operation,” some local coverage, and the books desk.

    Going forward, the paper will pivot to prioritizing news concerning “national security,” and topics like science, health, medicine, technology, climate and business.

    The Post’s book coverage—chiefly via the beloved Book World section—has long been a gold standard in the industry. Critics like John Williams, Becca Rothfeld, Jacob Brogan, Michael Dirda, and Ron Charles have shaped the literary landscape. For decades, in some cases.

    Book World originated in the aftermath of Watergate. In a fond 2022 reflection, editor Dirda described the section’s early days, during which he nurtured and commissioned many literary greats—like the polymath Guy Davenport, the novelist Angela Carter, and David Remnick, who’d go on to edit The New Yorker.

    It’s critical voices like these who will be first affected by the section’s sunsetting. But authors and publishers should also worry about what the end of Book World means for national press.

    At least Charles, who learned of his firing while eating “eating one of the two remaining Harry & David pears that the Post sent to celebrate [his] 20th anniversary at the paper,” is determined not to go gentle. He is starting a Substack.

    In his first missive to readers, the unleashed critic quipped: “Honestly, the worst aspect of this impoverishing, family-wrecking, confidence-crushing ordeal is that it will inspire David Brooks to write an essay about the hubris of American media.”

    Meanwhile, the paper’s long term strategy remains unclear. As the Times reported, the Post is “far from alone” in the battle to stay relevant in a downward-trending media ecosystem whose traffic is increasingly threatened by AI summaries. But it is possibly the only outlet where the bottom line is meaningless, given the owner is richer than Satan.

    Bezos, whose personal wealth is estimated at $261 billion, could not be reached for comment about any of the cuts his team architected.

    Post employees who have been laid off will continue to be on staff through mid-April, though “they will not be required to work.” Health insurance coverage will continue for six months.

    A union-led protest to denounce the cuts is scheduled for tomorrow.

    Continue/Read Original Article Here: Literary Hub » The Washington Post is gutting its books coverage.

    Tags: Book Reviews, Book World, Books, Critics, Editorial Pivot, Journalists, Literary Hub, Matt Murray, National Newspapers, The Washington Post
    #BookReviews #BookWorld #Books #Critics #EditorialPivot #Journalists #LiteraryHub #MattMurray #NationalNewspapers #TheWashingtonPost
  3. The Washington Post is gutting its books coverage – Literary Hub

    The Washington Post is gutting its books coverage.

    By Brittany Allen, February 4, 2026

    Earlier today, Jeff Bezos’ Washington Post laid off hundreds of its employees, in what one staffer called “an absolute bloodbath.”

    As The Guardian reported this morning, editor-in-chief Matt Murray told his masthead that the paper was due for a “strategic reset.” Citing flagging subscriptions and grim growth, Murray announced that the Post would be laying off a third of its workforce, and sundowning several popular sections—including the sports desk, the daily news podcast, most of the “international reporting operation,” some local coverage, and the books desk.

    Going forward, the paper will pivot to prioritizing news concerning “national security,” and topics like science, health, medicine, technology, climate and business.

    The Post’s book coverage—chiefly via the beloved Book World section—has long been a gold standard in the industry. Critics like John Williams, Becca Rothfeld, Jacob Brogan, Michael Dirda, and Ron Charles have shaped the literary landscape. For decades, in some cases.

    Book World originated in the aftermath of Watergate. In a fond 2022 reflection, editor Dirda described the section’s early days, during which he nurtured and commissioned many literary greats—like the polymath Guy Davenport, the novelist Angela Carter, and David Remnick, who’d go on to edit The New Yorker.

    It’s critical voices like these who will be first affected by the section’s sunsetting. But authors and publishers should also worry about what the end of Book World means for national press.

    At least Charles, who learned of his firing while eating “eating one of the two remaining Harry & David pears that the Post sent to celebrate [his] 20th anniversary at the paper,” is determined not to go gentle. He is starting a Substack.

    In his first missive to readers, the unleashed critic quipped: “Honestly, the worst aspect of this impoverishing, family-wrecking, confidence-crushing ordeal is that it will inspire David Brooks to write an essay about the hubris of American media.”

    Meanwhile, the paper’s long term strategy remains unclear. As the Times reported, the Post is “far from alone” in the battle to stay relevant in a downward-trending media ecosystem whose traffic is increasingly threatened by AI summaries. But it is possibly the only outlet where the bottom line is meaningless, given the owner is richer than Satan.

    Bezos, whose personal wealth is estimated at $261 billion, could not be reached for comment about any of the cuts his team architected.

    Post employees who have been laid off will continue to be on staff through mid-April, though “they will not be required to work.” Health insurance coverage will continue for six months.

    A union-led protest to denounce the cuts is scheduled for tomorrow.

    Continue/Read Original Article Here: Literary Hub » The Washington Post is gutting its books coverage.

    Tags: Book Reviews, Book World, Books, Critics, Editorial Pivot, Journalists, Literary Hub, Matt Murray, National Newspapers, The Washington Post
    #BookReviews #BookWorld #Books #Critics #EditorialPivot #Journalists #LiteraryHub #MattMurray #NationalNewspapers #TheWashingtonPost
  4. The Washington Post is gutting its books coverage – Literary Hub

    The Washington Post is gutting its books coverage.

    By Brittany Allen, February 4, 2026

    Earlier today, Jeff Bezos’ Washington Post laid off hundreds of its employees, in what one staffer called “an absolute bloodbath.”

    As The Guardian reported this morning, editor-in-chief Matt Murray told his masthead that the paper was due for a “strategic reset.” Citing flagging subscriptions and grim growth, Murray announced that the Post would be laying off a third of its workforce, and sundowning several popular sections—including the sports desk, the daily news podcast, most of the “international reporting operation,” some local coverage, and the books desk.

    Going forward, the paper will pivot to prioritizing news concerning “national security,” and topics like science, health, medicine, technology, climate and business.

    The Post’s book coverage—chiefly via the beloved Book World section—has long been a gold standard in the industry. Critics like John Williams, Becca Rothfeld, Jacob Brogan, Michael Dirda, and Ron Charles have shaped the literary landscape. For decades, in some cases.

    Book World originated in the aftermath of Watergate. In a fond 2022 reflection, editor Dirda described the section’s early days, during which he nurtured and commissioned many literary greats—like the polymath Guy Davenport, the novelist Angela Carter, and David Remnick, who’d go on to edit The New Yorker.

    It’s critical voices like these who will be first affected by the section’s sunsetting. But authors and publishers should also worry about what the end of Book World means for national press.

    At least Charles, who learned of his firing while eating “eating one of the two remaining Harry & David pears that the Post sent to celebrate [his] 20th anniversary at the paper,” is determined not to go gentle. He is starting a Substack.

    In his first missive to readers, the unleashed critic quipped: “Honestly, the worst aspect of this impoverishing, family-wrecking, confidence-crushing ordeal is that it will inspire David Brooks to write an essay about the hubris of American media.”

    Meanwhile, the paper’s long term strategy remains unclear. As the Times reported, the Post is “far from alone” in the battle to stay relevant in a downward-trending media ecosystem whose traffic is increasingly threatened by AI summaries. But it is possibly the only outlet where the bottom line is meaningless, given the owner is richer than Satan.

    Bezos, whose personal wealth is estimated at $261 billion, could not be reached for comment about any of the cuts his team architected.

    Post employees who have been laid off will continue to be on staff through mid-April, though “they will not be required to work.” Health insurance coverage will continue for six months.

    A union-led protest to denounce the cuts is scheduled for tomorrow.

    Continue/Read Original Article Here: Literary Hub » The Washington Post is gutting its books coverage.

    Tags: Book Reviews, Book World, Books, Critics, Editorial Pivot, Journalists, Literary Hub, Matt Murray, National Newspapers, The Washington Post
    #BookReviews #BookWorld #Books #Critics #EditorialPivot #Journalists #LiteraryHub #MattMurray #NationalNewspapers #TheWashingtonPost
  5. The real reason why Jeff Bezos killed the Washington Post. – Slate

    The Media

    Jeff Bezos Killed the Washington Post

    The billionaire wanted the Post to die, because a vigorous, well-resourced newspaper does not help his bottom line.

    By Alex Kirshner, Feb 05, 202611:07 AM

    Photo illustration by Slate. Photos by Arnold Jerocki / FilmMagic and Andrew Harnik /Getty Images.

    Copy Link Share Comment

    Sign up for the Slatest to get the most insightful analysis, criticism, and advice out there, delivered to your inbox daily.

    Jeff Bezos killed the Washington Post on Wednesday. The paper survives as a husk, but the institution that became one of the cathedrals of world journalism is gone. The biggest mistake one could make in analyzing this corporate slaughter is to lay the blame solely on the state of journalism. That’d be wrong.

    Times are hard in journalism, just like they always are. The big new problem is A.I. swallowing up search traffic, which itself had already sucked up the ad revenue that used to go to newspapers and magazines. Otherwise, all of the things that have been hard for the past 20 years are still hard now. Powerful corporate interests have captured great newsrooms, or run their own old family businesses into the ground. Fox News, social media, and podcasts—in that chronological order—have cocooned a lot of people to want only “news” that isn’t really news. Megyn Kelly is now a red-meat podcaster instead of an occasionally punchy Fox host.

    The Post laid off 300 journalists on Wednesday. This included more or less the entire remaining staff of the paper’s legendary sports section, which produced several of the best writers to ever do the job. The days of the superstar columnist with the biggest megaphone in town were long gone, but the section remained tremendous. The paper slashed its international coverage, laying off a journalist who found out as she reported from Kyiv. Many editors across desks lost their jobs. Worst of all, not that it’s a contest, but the Washington Post will now be a lot less Washingtonian. The paper has fired at least a substantial chunk of its metro reporters, who serviced a city and region that have been under a multifront attack from the Trump administration.

    In a stiff email, Post executive editor Matt Murray tried to make this move sound like yet another example of a tough business forcing tough decisions. “The ecosystem of news and information, on- and off-platform, is changing radically,” Murray wrote to his staffers, fired and not. He lamented the “serious decline” of search traffic. He wrote of increased competition from other people, other platforms.

    AI image…

    He did not write about one specific person: Bezos, who bought the paper from the Graham family in 2013 for $250 million. (Note: Slate is owned by Graham Holdings, the company controlled by the Graham family.)

    That is because Murray values his paycheck and didn’t want to point out the Post’s real cause of death—namely, that one of the richest people in human history staged a controlled burn to turn it into ash. Bezos wanted the Post to die, because a vigorous, well-resourced Washington Post does not suit his vision for the world or his own bottom line. The end of the Post is a matter not of journalistic economics but of Bezos’ incentives.

    Whatever the Post is worth today is immaterial to Bezos’ wealth. It’s barely even what you’d call a rounding error. Bezos could sustain the Post’s operating losses for hundreds of lifetimes without even threatening his current wealth, let alone the additional wealth he and his heirs will amass passively in years to come from his stakes in Amazon, Blue Origin, and who knows what else.

    A man worth more than $240 billion does not care even a little bit, in pure dollar terms, about a $100 million annual loss running a prestige business. When Bezos bought the paper, he made clear to the Post’s prior management that he viewed the paper not purely through a profit lens, the New York Times reported. Bezos wrote to Post employees, “The paper’s duty will remain to its readers and not to the private interests of its owners.” That turned out to be, at best, incredibly misleading.

    The Post itself doesn’t affect Bezos’ vast fortune much, but what it represents does. One of the employees he laid off on Wednesday was the paper’s Amazon reporter, Caroline O’Donovan. More critically, even under Bezos’ ownership, the Post frequently published stories that upset the Trump administration, whose vindictive approach to regulation could pose obvious problems for Amazon and Bezos’ space company, Blue Origin.

    Related From Slate

    Mary ZieglerHow Trump Used a Law Meant to Protect Abortion Seekers to Arrest Members of the Press Read More

    Bezos understood this risk more than a year ago, when he drove away 250,000 paying subscribers by stepping in to prevent the paper from endorsing Kamala Harris. Bezos then transformed the Post’s opinion section, away from a broad-based page and into a propaganda arm devoted to promoting “personal liberties and free markets.”

    The paper’s executives and owner punted away from aggressively covering Trump’s second term, bleeding both subscribers and a general share of viral stories that instead went to competitors like the Times and Wall Street Journal. There was money to be made by investing in the paper’s reporting staff, who never stopped doing their best to provide honest (and necessarily adversarial) coverage of Trump. Bezos just didn’t want that money.

    Editor’s Note: Read the rest of the story, at the below link.

    Continue/Read Original Article Here: The real reason why Jeff Bezos killed the Washington Post.

    Tags: AI, Competitors, Jeff Bezos, Journalism, Katherine Graham, Killed, Matt Murray, Newspapers Changing, Real Reason, Slate, Social Media
    #AI #Competitors #JeffBezos #Journalism #KatherineGraham #Killed #MattMurray #NewspapersChanging #RealReason #Slate #SocialMedia
  6. The real reason why Jeff Bezos killed the Washington Post. – Slate

    The Media

    Jeff Bezos Killed the Washington Post

    The billionaire wanted the Post to die, because a vigorous, well-resourced newspaper does not help his bottom line.

    By Alex Kirshner, Feb 05, 202611:07 AM

    Photo illustration by Slate. Photos by Arnold Jerocki / FilmMagic and Andrew Harnik /Getty Images.

    Copy Link Share Comment

    Sign up for the Slatest to get the most insightful analysis, criticism, and advice out there, delivered to your inbox daily.

    Jeff Bezos killed the Washington Post on Wednesday. The paper survives as a husk, but the institution that became one of the cathedrals of world journalism is gone. The biggest mistake one could make in analyzing this corporate slaughter is to lay the blame solely on the state of journalism. That’d be wrong.

    Times are hard in journalism, just like they always are. The big new problem is A.I. swallowing up search traffic, which itself had already sucked up the ad revenue that used to go to newspapers and magazines. Otherwise, all of the things that have been hard for the past 20 years are still hard now. Powerful corporate interests have captured great newsrooms, or run their own old family businesses into the ground. Fox News, social media, and podcasts—in that chronological order—have cocooned a lot of people to want only “news” that isn’t really news. Megyn Kelly is now a red-meat podcaster instead of an occasionally punchy Fox host.

    The Post laid off 300 journalists on Wednesday. This included more or less the entire remaining staff of the paper’s legendary sports section, which produced several of the best writers to ever do the job. The days of the superstar columnist with the biggest megaphone in town were long gone, but the section remained tremendous. The paper slashed its international coverage, laying off a journalist who found out as she reported from Kyiv. Many editors across desks lost their jobs. Worst of all, not that it’s a contest, but the Washington Post will now be a lot less Washingtonian. The paper has fired at least a substantial chunk of its metro reporters, who serviced a city and region that have been under a multifront attack from the Trump administration.

    In a stiff email, Post executive editor Matt Murray tried to make this move sound like yet another example of a tough business forcing tough decisions. “The ecosystem of news and information, on- and off-platform, is changing radically,” Murray wrote to his staffers, fired and not. He lamented the “serious decline” of search traffic. He wrote of increased competition from other people, other platforms.

    AI image…

    He did not write about one specific person: Bezos, who bought the paper from the Graham family in 2013 for $250 million. (Note: Slate is owned by Graham Holdings, the company controlled by the Graham family.)

    That is because Murray values his paycheck and didn’t want to point out the Post’s real cause of death—namely, that one of the richest people in human history staged a controlled burn to turn it into ash. Bezos wanted the Post to die, because a vigorous, well-resourced Washington Post does not suit his vision for the world or his own bottom line. The end of the Post is a matter not of journalistic economics but of Bezos’ incentives.

    Whatever the Post is worth today is immaterial to Bezos’ wealth. It’s barely even what you’d call a rounding error. Bezos could sustain the Post’s operating losses for hundreds of lifetimes without even threatening his current wealth, let alone the additional wealth he and his heirs will amass passively in years to come from his stakes in Amazon, Blue Origin, and who knows what else.

    A man worth more than $240 billion does not care even a little bit, in pure dollar terms, about a $100 million annual loss running a prestige business. When Bezos bought the paper, he made clear to the Post’s prior management that he viewed the paper not purely through a profit lens, the New York Times reported. Bezos wrote to Post employees, “The paper’s duty will remain to its readers and not to the private interests of its owners.” That turned out to be, at best, incredibly misleading.

    The Post itself doesn’t affect Bezos’ vast fortune much, but what it represents does. One of the employees he laid off on Wednesday was the paper’s Amazon reporter, Caroline O’Donovan. More critically, even under Bezos’ ownership, the Post frequently published stories that upset the Trump administration, whose vindictive approach to regulation could pose obvious problems for Amazon and Bezos’ space company, Blue Origin.

    Related From Slate

    Mary ZieglerHow Trump Used a Law Meant to Protect Abortion Seekers to Arrest Members of the Press Read More

    Bezos understood this risk more than a year ago, when he drove away 250,000 paying subscribers by stepping in to prevent the paper from endorsing Kamala Harris. Bezos then transformed the Post’s opinion section, away from a broad-based page and into a propaganda arm devoted to promoting “personal liberties and free markets.”

    The paper’s executives and owner punted away from aggressively covering Trump’s second term, bleeding both subscribers and a general share of viral stories that instead went to competitors like the Times and Wall Street Journal. There was money to be made by investing in the paper’s reporting staff, who never stopped doing their best to provide honest (and necessarily adversarial) coverage of Trump. Bezos just didn’t want that money.

    Editor’s Note: Read the rest of the story, at the below link.

    Continue/Read Original Article Here: The real reason why Jeff Bezos killed the Washington Post.

    Tags: AI, Competitors, Jeff Bezos, Journalism, Katherine Graham, Killed, Matt Murray, Newspapers Changing, Real Reason, Slate, Social Media
    #AI #Competitors #JeffBezos #Journalism #KatherineGraham #Killed #MattMurray #NewspapersChanging #RealReason #Slate #SocialMedia
  7. The real reason why Jeff Bezos killed the Washington Post. – Slate

    The Media

    Jeff Bezos Killed the Washington Post

    The billionaire wanted the Post to die, because a vigorous, well-resourced newspaper does not help his bottom line.

    By Alex Kirshner, Feb 05, 202611:07 AM

    Photo illustration by Slate. Photos by Arnold Jerocki / FilmMagic and Andrew Harnik /Getty Images.

    Copy Link Share Comment

    Sign up for the Slatest to get the most insightful analysis, criticism, and advice out there, delivered to your inbox daily.

    Jeff Bezos killed the Washington Post on Wednesday. The paper survives as a husk, but the institution that became one of the cathedrals of world journalism is gone. The biggest mistake one could make in analyzing this corporate slaughter is to lay the blame solely on the state of journalism. That’d be wrong.

    Times are hard in journalism, just like they always are. The big new problem is A.I. swallowing up search traffic, which itself had already sucked up the ad revenue that used to go to newspapers and magazines. Otherwise, all of the things that have been hard for the past 20 years are still hard now. Powerful corporate interests have captured great newsrooms, or run their own old family businesses into the ground. Fox News, social media, and podcasts—in that chronological order—have cocooned a lot of people to want only “news” that isn’t really news. Megyn Kelly is now a red-meat podcaster instead of an occasionally punchy Fox host.

    The Post laid off 300 journalists on Wednesday. This included more or less the entire remaining staff of the paper’s legendary sports section, which produced several of the best writers to ever do the job. The days of the superstar columnist with the biggest megaphone in town were long gone, but the section remained tremendous. The paper slashed its international coverage, laying off a journalist who found out as she reported from Kyiv. Many editors across desks lost their jobs. Worst of all, not that it’s a contest, but the Washington Post will now be a lot less Washingtonian. The paper has fired at least a substantial chunk of its metro reporters, who serviced a city and region that have been under a multifront attack from the Trump administration.

    In a stiff email, Post executive editor Matt Murray tried to make this move sound like yet another example of a tough business forcing tough decisions. “The ecosystem of news and information, on- and off-platform, is changing radically,” Murray wrote to his staffers, fired and not. He lamented the “serious decline” of search traffic. He wrote of increased competition from other people, other platforms.

    AI image…

    He did not write about one specific person: Bezos, who bought the paper from the Graham family in 2013 for $250 million. (Note: Slate is owned by Graham Holdings, the company controlled by the Graham family.)

    That is because Murray values his paycheck and didn’t want to point out the Post’s real cause of death—namely, that one of the richest people in human history staged a controlled burn to turn it into ash. Bezos wanted the Post to die, because a vigorous, well-resourced Washington Post does not suit his vision for the world or his own bottom line. The end of the Post is a matter not of journalistic economics but of Bezos’ incentives.

    Whatever the Post is worth today is immaterial to Bezos’ wealth. It’s barely even what you’d call a rounding error. Bezos could sustain the Post’s operating losses for hundreds of lifetimes without even threatening his current wealth, let alone the additional wealth he and his heirs will amass passively in years to come from his stakes in Amazon, Blue Origin, and who knows what else.

    A man worth more than $240 billion does not care even a little bit, in pure dollar terms, about a $100 million annual loss running a prestige business. When Bezos bought the paper, he made clear to the Post’s prior management that he viewed the paper not purely through a profit lens, the New York Times reported. Bezos wrote to Post employees, “The paper’s duty will remain to its readers and not to the private interests of its owners.” That turned out to be, at best, incredibly misleading.

    The Post itself doesn’t affect Bezos’ vast fortune much, but what it represents does. One of the employees he laid off on Wednesday was the paper’s Amazon reporter, Caroline O’Donovan. More critically, even under Bezos’ ownership, the Post frequently published stories that upset the Trump administration, whose vindictive approach to regulation could pose obvious problems for Amazon and Bezos’ space company, Blue Origin.

    Related From Slate

    Mary ZieglerHow Trump Used a Law Meant to Protect Abortion Seekers to Arrest Members of the Press Read More

    Bezos understood this risk more than a year ago, when he drove away 250,000 paying subscribers by stepping in to prevent the paper from endorsing Kamala Harris. Bezos then transformed the Post’s opinion section, away from a broad-based page and into a propaganda arm devoted to promoting “personal liberties and free markets.”

    The paper’s executives and owner punted away from aggressively covering Trump’s second term, bleeding both subscribers and a general share of viral stories that instead went to competitors like the Times and Wall Street Journal. There was money to be made by investing in the paper’s reporting staff, who never stopped doing their best to provide honest (and necessarily adversarial) coverage of Trump. Bezos just didn’t want that money.

    Editor’s Note: Read the rest of the story, at the below link.

    Continue/Read Original Article Here: The real reason why Jeff Bezos killed the Washington Post.

    #AI #Competitors #JeffBezos #Journalism #KatherineGraham #Killed #MattMurray #NewspapersChanging #RealReason #Slate #SocialMedia
  8. The real reason why Jeff Bezos killed the Washington Post. – Slate

    The Media

    Jeff Bezos Killed the Washington Post

    The billionaire wanted the Post to die, because a vigorous, well-resourced newspaper does not help his bottom line.

    By Alex Kirshner, Feb 05, 202611:07 AM

    Photo illustration by Slate. Photos by Arnold Jerocki / FilmMagic and Andrew Harnik /Getty Images.

    Copy Link Share Comment

    Sign up for the Slatest to get the most insightful analysis, criticism, and advice out there, delivered to your inbox daily.

    Jeff Bezos killed the Washington Post on Wednesday. The paper survives as a husk, but the institution that became one of the cathedrals of world journalism is gone. The biggest mistake one could make in analyzing this corporate slaughter is to lay the blame solely on the state of journalism. That’d be wrong.

    Times are hard in journalism, just like they always are. The big new problem is A.I. swallowing up search traffic, which itself had already sucked up the ad revenue that used to go to newspapers and magazines. Otherwise, all of the things that have been hard for the past 20 years are still hard now. Powerful corporate interests have captured great newsrooms, or run their own old family businesses into the ground. Fox News, social media, and podcasts—in that chronological order—have cocooned a lot of people to want only “news” that isn’t really news. Megyn Kelly is now a red-meat podcaster instead of an occasionally punchy Fox host.

    The Post laid off 300 journalists on Wednesday. This included more or less the entire remaining staff of the paper’s legendary sports section, which produced several of the best writers to ever do the job. The days of the superstar columnist with the biggest megaphone in town were long gone, but the section remained tremendous. The paper slashed its international coverage, laying off a journalist who found out as she reported from Kyiv. Many editors across desks lost their jobs. Worst of all, not that it’s a contest, but the Washington Post will now be a lot less Washingtonian. The paper has fired at least a substantial chunk of its metro reporters, who serviced a city and region that have been under a multifront attack from the Trump administration.

    In a stiff email, Post executive editor Matt Murray tried to make this move sound like yet another example of a tough business forcing tough decisions. “The ecosystem of news and information, on- and off-platform, is changing radically,” Murray wrote to his staffers, fired and not. He lamented the “serious decline” of search traffic. He wrote of increased competition from other people, other platforms.

    AI image…

    He did not write about one specific person: Bezos, who bought the paper from the Graham family in 2013 for $250 million. (Note: Slate is owned by Graham Holdings, the company controlled by the Graham family.)

    That is because Murray values his paycheck and didn’t want to point out the Post’s real cause of death—namely, that one of the richest people in human history staged a controlled burn to turn it into ash. Bezos wanted the Post to die, because a vigorous, well-resourced Washington Post does not suit his vision for the world or his own bottom line. The end of the Post is a matter not of journalistic economics but of Bezos’ incentives.

    Whatever the Post is worth today is immaterial to Bezos’ wealth. It’s barely even what you’d call a rounding error. Bezos could sustain the Post’s operating losses for hundreds of lifetimes without even threatening his current wealth, let alone the additional wealth he and his heirs will amass passively in years to come from his stakes in Amazon, Blue Origin, and who knows what else.

    A man worth more than $240 billion does not care even a little bit, in pure dollar terms, about a $100 million annual loss running a prestige business. When Bezos bought the paper, he made clear to the Post’s prior management that he viewed the paper not purely through a profit lens, the New York Times reported. Bezos wrote to Post employees, “The paper’s duty will remain to its readers and not to the private interests of its owners.” That turned out to be, at best, incredibly misleading.

    The Post itself doesn’t affect Bezos’ vast fortune much, but what it represents does. One of the employees he laid off on Wednesday was the paper’s Amazon reporter, Caroline O’Donovan. More critically, even under Bezos’ ownership, the Post frequently published stories that upset the Trump administration, whose vindictive approach to regulation could pose obvious problems for Amazon and Bezos’ space company, Blue Origin.

    Related From Slate

    Mary ZieglerHow Trump Used a Law Meant to Protect Abortion Seekers to Arrest Members of the Press Read More

    Bezos understood this risk more than a year ago, when he drove away 250,000 paying subscribers by stepping in to prevent the paper from endorsing Kamala Harris. Bezos then transformed the Post’s opinion section, away from a broad-based page and into a propaganda arm devoted to promoting “personal liberties and free markets.”

    The paper’s executives and owner punted away from aggressively covering Trump’s second term, bleeding both subscribers and a general share of viral stories that instead went to competitors like the Times and Wall Street Journal. There was money to be made by investing in the paper’s reporting staff, who never stopped doing their best to provide honest (and necessarily adversarial) coverage of Trump. Bezos just didn’t want that money.

    Editor’s Note: Read the rest of the story, at the below link.

    Continue/Read Original Article Here: The real reason why Jeff Bezos killed the Washington Post.

    Tags: AI, Competitors, Jeff Bezos, Journalism, Katherine Graham, Killed, Matt Murray, Newspapers Changing, Real Reason, Slate, Social Media
    #AI #Competitors #JeffBezos #Journalism #KatherineGraham #Killed #MattMurray #NewspapersChanging #RealReason #Slate #SocialMedia