Why does Jeff Bezos still own the Washington Post?

300 journalists lost their jobs The Washington Post. More than 300,000 readers canceled their subscriptions. Owner Jeff Bezos, who bought the legendary publication in 2013, has ruined his reputation by using his vast empire to produce content designed to please President Donald Trump: Amazon MGM Studios spent $40 million to produce a documentary about Melania Trump, which premiered days before the presidential election. mail Mass layoff notices sent out. However, he has gained nothing from his attempts to curry favor with Donald Trump — at least, nothing that is a net positive for his bottom line..

Which raises the ironic question: Why does he even have one? the The Washington Post At all?

The age of Trump is, ultimately, an age of cynicism and transactionism. Billionaires, CEOs, and world leaders quickly realized that Trump’s currying favor would get them what they wanted — amnesty, tariff relief, lifting export controls, approving a merger deal, and quashing the investigation. And when it comes to media companies, the Paramount-Skydance merger has put a barrier to Trump’s sycophancy. In order to obtain regulatory approval, Skydance CEO David Ellison pushed CBS to settle the defamation lawsuit brought by Trump, which was canceled. The Late Show With Stephen Colbert, He appointed Barry Weiss, a right-wing affiliate with no newsroom leadership experience, as editor-in-chief of CBS News. In short, Ellison had to commit to neutralizing CBS’ ability to criticize Trump. But it is an act Get a $28 billion merger out of it.

On the other hand, Bezos’ media plays seem self-contradictory. Funding a fawning documentary about Melania Trump is incompatible with owning a media company with a 150-year-old legacy of holding politicians accountable, especially one that famously held Trump accountable during his first administration. (If the goal is to neutralize mail Also, puzzlingly, his deputy, Will Lewis, fired everyone Excludes For those in political offices.) Even his attempt to separate political views from opinions mailPress’s, trying to have it both ways, backfired. After he announced that the opinion page would now reflect more conservative views, reporters began leaving the page mail In large numbers, the number of subscribers decreased further. as mailFormer editor-in-chief Marty Barron Put them in a column shortly after the layoffsIt was “almost instantaneous brand self-destruction.”

One could argue – as And Abu The layoffs were necessary because the newspaper was losing money, insiders told media reporters. But billionaires have plenty of face-saving ways to get an unprofitable media outlet off their hands, in a way that doesn’t involve mass layoffs (or at least, offloading the layoffs to its next owner). philadelphia inquirer, For example, it was donated by its billionaire owner to a non-profit foundation, while the Facebook billionaire Chris Hughes ended up selling New Republic To win McCormack After his failed attempt to reshape the 100-year-old magazine. the mail, Which, while growing its digital audience throughout Bezos’ ownership, would have attracted buyers immediately: Last year, tech journalist Kara Swisher announced that she and several investors were willing to buy the company. mail From Bezos, but reportedly did not hear back.

Perhaps Bezos needs to curry favor with Trump to advance Amazon’s interests, which would make more sense if Bezos were still running the company. Except he doesn’t do that. He stepped down as CEO in 2021. Amazon, whose AWS subsidiary holds the lion’s share of federal government contracts, was able to independently take on Trump through donations to the new White House Hall Fund. (Admittedly, Bezos’ government contracts with NASA are on the table, and he was reportedly spotted hanging out with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth at the Blue Origin facility in Florida on the day of the attack. mail layoffs.)

Maybe this pile of self-contradictions – or, He also once described his ownership of mail“Complicated” – It was inevitable when Trump returned to office and made it clear that he would punish the big tech entities that displeased him. But there is no clear, logical explanation for why Bezos resorted to his plea: no explanation that makes financial sense, no explanation that immediately strengthens his political standing with Trump, and no explanation that reaffirms the commitment he once made to protecting the First Amendment. This lack of clarity only makes… mail’Beheading is even more absurd.