The Washington Post says it won't support a presidential candidate for the first time in 30 years US elections 2024

For the first time in more than 30 years, The Washington Post announced Friday that its editorial board will not endorse a candidate for president.

“We are returning to our roots and are not endorsing any presidential candidates,” Will Lewis, publisher and chief executive of the newspaper, said in a statement Friday, less than two weeks before the 2024 presidential election.

The Washington Post editorial board has supported a candidate in almost every presidential election since it supported Jimmy Carter in 1976. Jeff Bezos, the billionaire owner of Amazon, bought the post office in 2013.

Postal leadership's decision not to endorse a candidate in an election widely seen as the most consequential in recent U.S. history sparked outrage among some prominent former employees.

Marty Baron, the former editor-in-chief of the Washington Post, criticized the newspaper's decision, calling it “cowardice of which democracy is the victim.”

Republican candidate Donald Trump, Baron said, will see this “as an invitation to further intimidate the owner” of the Washington Post, billionaire Jeff Bezos. “Disturbing spinelessness in an institution known for its courage,” he added.

This also comes after widespread dismay over a similar decision earlier this week by billionaire Los Angeles Times owner Patrick Soon-Shiong to block a planned presidential endorsement of Kamala Harris. This move sparked high-profile resignations at the publication out of anger from the staff.

In his statement about the Post's decision, Lewis pointed to previous times when the newspaper's editorial board decided not to support presidential candidates, citing independent journalism that Lewis described as “right” and to which the newspaper is now “returning.”

“We recognize that this will be interpreted in a variety of ways, including as a tacit endorsement of one candidate, a condemnation of another, or an abdication of responsibility,” Lewis said.

“It’s inevitable,” he said, adding: “We don’t see it that way.”

Rather, Lewis said it was “consistent with the values” the newspaper stood for and with what the newspaper wanted in a leader: “character and courage in the service of American ethics, reverence for the rule of law and respect for the people.” People. “Freedom in all its aspects”.

Lewis added that he believes the non-endorsement is also a statement that supports readers' ability to form their own opinions about the most consequential of all American decisions – “who to vote for as the next president.”

“Our mission at The Washington Post is to provide unbiased news for all Americans through the newsroom and to provide thought-provoking, reported views from our opinion team to help our readers form their own opinions,” he said, adding: “Most importantly, as a newspaper in the capital of the most important country in the world, our job is to be independent.”

“And that is what we are and will be,” he concluded.

NPR reported that many Washington Post employees reacted “shocked” and “universally negative.”

At the Los Angeles Times, the decision not to support the proposal led to its editor-in-chief, Mariel Garza, and several other board members resigning in protest.

“In dangerous times, honest people must stand up. This is how I stand up,” Garza told the Columbia Journalism Review about her decision to resign.

A Los Angeles Times journalist called her newspaper's decision “unreal” and “cowardly.”

Unlike the Los Angeles Times and Washington Post, the New York Times editorial board endorsed Kamala Harris in September, calling her “the only choice” for president.

The Guardian has also endorsed Harris.