Thank you, Matt. Because of you, I'm trying to restore my digital subscription to the Washington Post. Unfortunately, the phone lines are jammed, presumably with more people trying to cancel.
I said before as a comment on your original article about this that daily unbiased reporting is far more important to me than endorsements. I support the journalists and all the employees and unsubscribing only hurts them as Matt pointed out. I honestly have no problem with no endorsements. I think the days of newspaper endorsements being so important and influential are over. I know the editorial boards feel differently, but maybe just not endorsing helps not to fuel the bias stigma. It seems to only further mistrust and harms the ability to do the daily unbiased coverage that is so important. I truly do not think anyone is swayed by the endorsements. I may be wrong and am curious to hear other opinions.
once upon a time journalists were to report the news, NOT tell us how to think about it. 8% is nothing. Shows you that people just wanted to STAY in their echo chamber
I subscribe to both the LA Times and the Washington Post and I'm keeping both. I'm in Orange County and the LAT is incredibly valuable to me. The Washington Post is less so, but I come down where you do, I'm not ready to punish the journalists who work there. I also subscribe and pay for plenty of independent journalists work on Substack, but it's hard to get the breadth and depth that you do out of a regional or national paper. What is so frustrating is that it just feels like we are at the whims of these billionaire owners that are going to keep failing us and there really are no good ways to push back. But that isn't just about these papers, it's our society - Twitter, Meta, Amazon. The list goes on and on.
Not having a subscription because you’ve been lied to too many times to count with no apology or correction is not rewarding your gaslighter. Subscribing to journalists with ethics on Substack or other platforms is a much better move for free speech, never mind “classical training.” The best journalism has been often done by high school dropouts, who can write, see the effects of policy on the ground, and hope to undermine illegitimate power with truth. Legacy media told us, in ink, that the outcome is more important than the truth. I don’t like their manipulation or preferred outcome.
Like Matt Taibbi said, the millions and millions of viewers of Rogan are the asteroid, and legacy media are the dinosaurs. They deserve to go up in smoke.
Thank you, Matt. Because of you, I'm trying to restore my digital subscription to the Washington Post. Unfortunately, the phone lines are jammed, presumably with more people trying to cancel.
FYI, I was able to restore my Washington Post description by sending an email to its circulation department.
Just like Bezos to blame the victims.
I said before as a comment on your original article about this that daily unbiased reporting is far more important to me than endorsements. I support the journalists and all the employees and unsubscribing only hurts them as Matt pointed out. I honestly have no problem with no endorsements. I think the days of newspaper endorsements being so important and influential are over. I know the editorial boards feel differently, but maybe just not endorsing helps not to fuel the bias stigma. It seems to only further mistrust and harms the ability to do the daily unbiased coverage that is so important. I truly do not think anyone is swayed by the endorsements. I may be wrong and am curious to hear other opinions.
once upon a time journalists were to report the news, NOT tell us how to think about it. 8% is nothing. Shows you that people just wanted to STAY in their echo chamber
I subscribe to both the LA Times and the Washington Post and I'm keeping both. I'm in Orange County and the LAT is incredibly valuable to me. The Washington Post is less so, but I come down where you do, I'm not ready to punish the journalists who work there. I also subscribe and pay for plenty of independent journalists work on Substack, but it's hard to get the breadth and depth that you do out of a regional or national paper. What is so frustrating is that it just feels like we are at the whims of these billionaire owners that are going to keep failing us and there really are no good ways to push back. But that isn't just about these papers, it's our society - Twitter, Meta, Amazon. The list goes on and on.
Not having a subscription because you’ve been lied to too many times to count with no apology or correction is not rewarding your gaslighter. Subscribing to journalists with ethics on Substack or other platforms is a much better move for free speech, never mind “classical training.” The best journalism has been often done by high school dropouts, who can write, see the effects of policy on the ground, and hope to undermine illegitimate power with truth. Legacy media told us, in ink, that the outcome is more important than the truth. I don’t like their manipulation or preferred outcome.
Like Matt Taibbi said, the millions and millions of viewers of Rogan are the asteroid, and legacy media are the dinosaurs. They deserve to go up in smoke.
Canceling subscription for moral reasons, good. Cancelling subscriptions for revenge, not good. Stop trying to kill the messengers🤦♀️