Bezos Just Exposed That Washington Post Staff Don’t Want to Be Taken Seriously
Bezos’s push for free market principles not only makes the Washington Post more palatable to millions of Americans; it attempts to restore decency to political conversations.
Jeff Bezos announced he’s altering the focus of The Washington Post’s Opinion page, prompting its editor to resign.
Chief Economics Reporter Jeff Stein initially posted an internal email from Bezos on X. Stein dubbed his boss’s email "a “massive encroachment” by making clear “dissenting views will not be published or tolerated.”
Stein works on the so-called “news” side of The Washington Post, while Bezos’s email was targeted at the opinion section. I, like you, struggle to tell the difference as well. Especially as the Chief Economics Reporter of the “news” division vocally reprimanded the promotion of free markets.
The email from Bezos read:
I’m writing to let you know about a change coming to our opinion pages.
We are going to be writing every day in support and defense of two pillars: personal liberties and free markets. We’ll cover other topics too of course, but viewpoints opposing those pillars will be left to be published by others.
There was a time when a newspaper, especially one that was a local monopoly, might have seen it as a service to bring to the reader’s doorstep every morning a brand-bassed opinion section that sought to cover all views. Today, the internet does that job.
In a post to X, Bezos confirmed the contents of the email and acknowledged that the Washington Post’s Opinion Page Editor David Shipley — er, former? — resigned. Bezos claimed that he offered Shipley the position requiring “100% commitment” to pushing a new pro-America vision. Shipley “decided to step away.”
The irony of Washington Post staffers melting down for learning “some dissenting views won’t be tolerated” is not lost on me. The opinion pages rarely, if ever, see a conservative dissenting view as it stands.
For a moment though, I questioned Bezos’s decision. After all, what’s the point of having an opinion section without multiple opinions?
Then I read Bezos’s statement a few more times. And it hit me — this is setting a standard to focus the opinion writers on a mission: creating real, thought-provoking pieces. That’s a win.
In a 24/7 news cycle, there are a lot of stories to choose from. Some of them are serious (i.e. Chicago City Council Approves Controversial New Bond Plan), and some of them are insane (i.e. OnlyFan Star Bonnie Blue Fakes Pregnancy For Clicks). And the mission of an allegedly distinguished news and opinion outlet would be to report or opine on the former.
You wouldn’t know that’s the goal of The Washington Post if you opened their opinion page. Here are some headlines from Feb. 26, 2025…
“To boycott or not to boycott? The role of art in the new Trump era.”
And my personal favorite, “What we learned about politics by talking about… wolves: The U.S. suffers from ‘affective polarization.’ We saw it at the National Wolf Conversation.”
Pardon my French, but who the f**k is paying to read that?
Bezos’s push for free market principles not only makes the Washington Post more palatable to millions of Americans; it attempts to restore decency to political conversations.
Bezos is right. If you want to talk about how wolves coincide with politics, watch a YouTube video on it. If you want to discuss the role of art in boycotting, go make a TikTok. Journalistic institutions that want to be taken seriously should talk about serious topics. The Washington Post staff proved, yet again, they’re not interested in being taken seriously.
If you like what you read, please leave a comment and send this article to a friend. Thank you for supporting my independent journalism. Got tips for stories? Send them to chrissy@underreportedstories.co (yes co, not com!)