In the final sprint of the fiercely competitive US presidential election, the three major newspapers in the United States – The Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, and USA Today choose not to endorse a specific presidential candidate anymore. They do not endorse the Democratic candidate, Vice President Harris, nor do they support the Republican candidate, former President Trump. Why are more and more major US newspapers making such neutral choices?
The publisher of The Washington Post, William Lewis, stated in a letter to readers on October 25 that the newspaper will not endorse a presidential candidate for the 2024 election or any “future presidential election.” This marks the first time in 36 years that the newspaper did not endorse a specific candidate.
Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong, owner of the Los Angeles Times, also announced on October 25 that in a tumultuous election year, refraining from advising readers on which presidential candidate to support would reduce national divisions.
USA Today, the largest national publication and digital media outlet in the United States, announced on October 28 that neither USA Today nor its parent company Gannett will endorse any presidential or national election candidate.
USA Today endorsed a Democratic presidential candidate for the first time in 2020 after 38 years and has now returned to a neutral position.
The decisions of these major newspapers quickly became headline news in the media industry.
For former President Trump, the neutral stance taken by these major newspapers indicates that they do not support the Democratic candidate, Vice President Harris. This step is seen as a victory for Trump in the final push before the election day.
At a large campaign rally in North Carolina on Wednesday, October 30, Trump told his supporters, “Did you notice The Washington Post and Los Angeles Times didn’t endorse anyone? Do you know what they’re really saying? Because they just endorsed the Democrats. They are now saying, ‘These Democrats are not good. They’re not good.’ They think I’m doing a great job. They just don’t want to say it.”
Trump also mentioned USA Today’s decision not to endorse any presidential candidate.
He said, “The Washington Post and USA Today, congratulations to you. I just heard USA Today is not endorsing. They say, ‘We’re not endorsing.’ That means they don’t think she (Harris) is good enough.”
In recent US presidential elections, most of the US media have openly supported Democratic presidential candidates, with few openly supporting Trump, reflecting the wide polarization in the US media industry.
Media outlets openly endorsing Harris in the 2024 election include The New York Times, The Boston Globe, The New Yorker, The Seattle Times, The Philadelphia Inquirer, The Denver Post, The San Antonio Express-News, and The Oregonian, among others.
The New York Times praised Harris as the “only patriotic choice” in its editorial, while criticizing Trump as “unfit to serve as president.”
Supporters of Trump include the New York Post, Washington Times, and Las Vegas Review-Journal, conservative media outlets.
The New York Post wrote, “(Trump) has shown the same strength and energy as in 2016, despite unprecedented, shameful weaponization by the judicial system against him, two assassination attempts, and hysterical continuous attacks by the media.”
The Wall Street Journal has not endorsed a presidential candidate since President Herbert Hoover (1929-1933) and has remained neutral.
The New York Times is the only national newspaper this year that still endorses a specific presidential candidate.
Local newspapers that abandoned endorsements and chose a neutral position this year include the Minnesota Star Tribune and the Tampa Bay Times.
The Washington Post endorsed Biden in 2020 and Clinton in 2016. This year, the newspaper decided to let readers make their own decisions. Publisher William Lewis stated in the letter to readers that The Washington Post’s job was “to provide nonpartisan news to all Americans through the newsroom and reflective perspectives from our Opinion team to help our readers make up their own minds.”
Owned by Jeff Bezos, one of the richest businessmen in the world, this is Lewis’ first year as publisher, having replaced longtime publisher Fred Ryan.
Lewis hopes that The Washington Post will remain neutral in future presidential elections, saying, “As the newspaper of the capital of the world’s most important country, our job is to maintain independence. This is what we are now and in the future.”
Similarly, the Los Angeles Times is leaving the choice of presidential candidates to readers. Its owner, Dr. Soon-Shiong, stated, “The process is about how we best inform our readers. No one is better placed than us to try to sift the facts from fiction and let readers themselves make the final decisions.”
Newspapers that persist in endorsements view it as their responsibility. Richard Jones, view editor at The Philadelphia Inquirer, said, “Our board believes deeply that endorsements are an important part of a newspaper’s public service mission, and – especially in a race as evenly contested as this year’s in Pennsylvania – these endorsements can be important tools for voters.”
Some internal and external critics believe that Jeff Bezos of The Washington Post and Dr. Soon-Shiong of the Los Angeles Times may be withdrawing endorsements to protect their non-news business interests or to preempt potential retaliation against their publications if Trump wins, or to avoid offending approximately half of their readers who may vote for Trump. However, a freelance journalist believes that the media should be independent and neutral, without backing any political candidate.
Jerry Moore, a former newspaper editor and opinion writer currently living in upstate New York, wrote in The Hill that if a media outlet supports a political candidate who then loses in the primaries, what should the outlet do next? Should they go on to support a candidate they previously opposed? If a supported candidate behaves unexpectedly, it could have a counterproductive effect on the media. These factors can lead readers to question the media’s judgment or the objectivity of their election coverage.
Moore believes that readers understand media outlets have positions on specific topics, which is indisputable. Writing opinion articles allows journalists to provide news in a unique way, as everyone has their own perspective.
However, Moore states that editorials are different, “These unsigned opinions express the collective views of the editorial board on a given topic, not that of a single individual.” He believes that editorials influence readers to some extent, and political endorsements can blur a newspaper’s independence.
“When newspapers endorse candidates in controversial elections,” Moore said, “readers typically don’t discuss the arguments for or against specific candidates – they are concerned about what ‘hidden agenda’ a particular endorsement might have. This is unhelpful in guiding readers to thoughtfully explore who is best suited for public office.”
In conclusion, he said, “Wise newspapers should abandon this practice and focus on providing readers with the relevant information needed to make the right decisions. This will enhance the credibility of media outlets and make readers more confident in the reliability of the news they receive.”