Summary

Jeff Bezos has directed The Washington Post to only publish opinions supporting free market economics, prompting criticism that he is using his ownership to shield pro-capitalist ideology.

This shift comes after past editorial interference, including blocking an endorsement of Kamala Harris.

Critics argue Bezos’s claim that pro-market views are “underserved” is absurd, given their dominance in major newspapers.

The move highlights concerns over billionaire control of media and the suppression of alternative economic perspectives, particularly those advocating for greater government intervention and worker rights.

  • formulaBonk@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Excuse me but who gives a fuck what a leech of his proportion has to say about economics. One of the biggest wellfare queens in the country shouldn’t be allowed anywhere near a microphone and here we are spreading his bullshit. Fuck bezos, let’s hope there is a Mario party future for him and his ilk

  • nick@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Jeff bezos is a ceo, who gives a fuck what he has to say on the economy?

    If the topic were “how to exploit workers to become a billionaire” sure maybe he’d have some pointers.

    • OmarDontScare@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 hours ago

      WaPo should really remove the ‘Democracy dies in darkness’ if they choose to no longer support democracy. Kind of like how Google removed the, ‘Don’t be evil’ motto, when it didn’t suit them anymore.

    • pdxfed@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      Amazon bought the rights to the Bond series last week.

      The dude has a triple mansion private island called the “billionaire bunker”. Is a media magnate, one of the richest, most powerful people in the world. Has insane, blackmailable data on almost any person’s ourchase history. Sitting behind the president at inauguration. Brutal to his employees in their warehouses and elsewhere. You can’t get any more bond villain than that!

    • isles@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Maybe free markets are better if everyone started at 0. But in free (unregulated) markets, the prime incentive is to convert public goods (the Commons) into private property, at the expense and loss of society. Our regulations are to force companies to be less evil against people with fewer resources.

      • anonymous111@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        11 hours ago

        I think we need definitions. Example: the EU has an internal free market for goods. This market is definitely not unregulated.

      • Hacksaw@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 day ago

        Adam Smith, the father of modern capitalism, was very clear that free markets had to be well regulated by definition otherwise they would tend towards monopolies and non productive rent seeking behaviors. Only a well regulated free market can remain stable and competitive in the long run.

        The capitalists aren’t even playing by their own playbook anymore they just want all the money and everyone else to die I guess.

        • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          24 hours ago

          Of course they don’t. Free market (how theory imagines it) is not pro capitalism. Competition is counterproductive to the profit motive, which is why large corporations look to kill the competition whenever they can.