Jeff Bezos could save 'The Washington Post,' but he won't. Here's why
Briefly

Jeff Bezos could save 'The Washington Post,' but he won't. Here's why
"News that the Washington Post had laid off hundreds of workers and scrapped several sections of the storied paper altogether stunned the journalism community last week. The Post cut roughly one-third of its staff, reduced local coverage, and completely destroyed its sports and international departments. The paper is owned by Jeff Bezos. The Amazon founder, who has a staggering net worth of approximately $250 billion, bought the Post for $250 million in 2013."
"The newspaper has consistently lost more money than it has made since the 2020 election, yet has long been considered a stalwart of American dailies. But last week, The Post's editor-in-chief Matt Murray told employees the layoffs were part of a "strategic reset" meant to attract more customers. Though he acknowledged the cuts were "painful," the overall messaging seemed to be that they were necessary."
"Of course, not everyone agrees. Martin Baron, who served as the outlet's executive editor until 2021, told The Guardian, "This ranks among the darkest days in the history of one of the world's greatest news organizations." But one question has persistently risen out of the fog of disappointment and disillusionment: if Jeff Bezos understood that owning such a vital newspaper was a "sacred trust," why is he no longer willing to keep it running at a loss for a tiny percentage of his net worth?"
The Washington Post eliminated roughly one-third of its newsroom, cut local coverage, and dismantled sports and international departments. Ownership by Jeff Bezos has not prevented sustained financial losses, with online ad revenue and print subscriptions declining and subscriber targets missed. Editor-in-chief Matt Murray described the reductions as a "strategic reset" intended to attract more customers and called the cuts painful but necessary. Former leadership labeled the moment deeply troubling. Questions emerged about why ownership would stop subsidizing a loss-making yet influential newspaper given the owner's vast personal wealth.
Read at Fast Company
Unable to calculate read time
[
|
]