'Plain old cowardice': WaPo publisher facing wave of outrage over endorsement snub

A Friday decision by the top management of the Washington Post to not make a 2024 presidential endorsement resulted in a flood of complaints, criticism and outrage on the media company's website after controversial publisher William Lewis issued an official statement.

On the heels of the LA Times following a similar path and not endorsing either Vice President Kamala Harris or ex-president Donald Trump at the direction of billionaire owner Patrick Soon-Shiong who overruled his editorial board which led to a flood of resignations, Lewis announced a parallel move.

In his letter to readers, Lewis, who has been under fire multiple times for spiking unflattering stories about himself, wrote, "The Washington Post will not be making an endorsement of a presidential candidate in this election. Nor in any future presidential election," and reached back to a 1960 decision to not endorse presidential candidates as a justification.

ALSO READ: Not even ‘Fox and Friends’ can hide Trump’s dementia

He later wrote, "We recognize that this will be read in a range of ways, including as a tacit endorsement of one candidate, or as a condemnation of another, or as an abdication of responsibility. That is inevitable. We don’t see it that way," before adding, "We also see it as a statement in support of our readers’ ability to make up their own minds on this, the most consequential of American decisions — whom to vote for as the next president."

Lewis' announcement also drew a harsh rebuke from legendary former WaPo editor Marty Baron.

Subscribers to the paper that adopted "Democracy dies in darkness" as its slogan immediately flooded the comment section condemning the decision, announcing they would be canceling their subscriptions and calling out Lewis and Amazon billionaire owner Jeff Bezos for "cowardice" in the face of Donald Trump's possible wrath.

In one cutting comment, a reader wrote, "Democracy dies in kowtowing to fascists."

Wyatt Merrit wrote, "Just cancelled my subscription, like so many others. Unfortunately my renewal date is in September; I wish I could get that money back. The extra 11 months of access is certainly worthless. There is no reason to read a media source which has discredited and debased itself to this extent. Surely there’s a critical mass of journalists with integrity out there, and I hope they find a way to create a responsible news outlet soon. "

Another reader wrote, "This is plain old cowardice," while another added, "Despicable, and this gaslighting as to the 'reason' is an absolute insult. At least tell the truth. As it is, another cancelled subscription."

"I have been a subscriber to your paper for over 20 years. I am shocked by your cowardly move to not endorse Kamala Harris. You are no longer a credible news organization. I guess Democracy truly does die in the darkness. You should be embarrassed by your disgraceful management of what used to be an outstanding media outlet," law877 contributed and then announced, "I just officially canceled my subscription, and you will never get my business again."

On X, Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA) wrote, "The first step towards fascism is when the free press cowers in fear."

Under the "DemocracyDiesInDarkness" hashtag, former Barack Obama adviser Tommy Vietor suggested, "The WaPo endorsing Harris would move exactly zero voters her way, but still lol at this cowardly shit from the crew that brought us 'democracy dies in darkness.'"

Former editor Baron wrote, "This is cowardice, with democracy as its casualty. [Trump] will see this as an invitation to further intimidate owner [Bezos] (and others). Disturbing spinelessness at an institution famed for courage."

Democratic strategist Simon Rosenberg warned, "What’s happening at the WaPo and LATimes is not about the editorials. It’s a warning to editors and writers to not do anything 'foolish' in the closing days. It’s a clear call for self-censorship."