Los Angeles Times Averts Presidential Endorsement, Sparks Controversy
Submitted by MAGA
Posted 3 hours ago
The Los Angeles Times, a long-standing figure in American media, has made the controversial decision not to endorse any candidate for president in this year's election.
This move comes amidst vast political polarization and the acknowledged importance of the upcoming election, described by the Times itself as “the most consequential in a generation.”
Despite this assertion, the editorial board, known for its Democratic endorsements in past elections—including Barack Obama and Joe Biden—was sidelined in the decision-making process by owner Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong.
This decision is not without precedent; in the 2020 election cycle, Soon-Shiong overruled the board after they had prepared to endorse Elizabeth Warren in the Democratic primary, resulting instead in no endorsement at all.
The lack of a presidential endorsement from such a prominent publication raises questions about the integrity of journalistic independence and the influence of ownership on editorial content.
Critics argue that the Times, which has a storied history of Democratic endorsements, now reveals an unwillingness to fully engage with the political landscape, presenting an impression of avoidance rather than forthrightness.
For many conservatives, this highlights a broader trend within leftist media outlets that cater to their owners’ viewpoints rather than allowing their editorial boards the freedom to express independent opinions.
With an editorial history that once included nearly a century of Republican endorsements, the Times’ decision signals a departure from its roots and raises crucial questions about the role and responsibility of media in democratic processes.
As the 2024 presidential race heats up, voters are left to wonder what impact, if any, this lack of a formal endorsement from a major publication will have on the electorate's views and decisions.
In this era of deeply entrenched partisan divides, the stakes have never been higher, and for many, the absence of a clear endorsement serves as further evidence of how the media landscape continues to shift and evolve, often in unexpected directions.
Sources:
semafor.com
nypost.com
nypost.com
This move comes amidst vast political polarization and the acknowledged importance of the upcoming election, described by the Times itself as “the most consequential in a generation.”
Despite this assertion, the editorial board, known for its Democratic endorsements in past elections—including Barack Obama and Joe Biden—was sidelined in the decision-making process by owner Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong.
This decision is not without precedent; in the 2020 election cycle, Soon-Shiong overruled the board after they had prepared to endorse Elizabeth Warren in the Democratic primary, resulting instead in no endorsement at all.
The lack of a presidential endorsement from such a prominent publication raises questions about the integrity of journalistic independence and the influence of ownership on editorial content.
Critics argue that the Times, which has a storied history of Democratic endorsements, now reveals an unwillingness to fully engage with the political landscape, presenting an impression of avoidance rather than forthrightness.
For many conservatives, this highlights a broader trend within leftist media outlets that cater to their owners’ viewpoints rather than allowing their editorial boards the freedom to express independent opinions.
With an editorial history that once included nearly a century of Republican endorsements, the Times’ decision signals a departure from its roots and raises crucial questions about the role and responsibility of media in democratic processes.
As the 2024 presidential race heats up, voters are left to wonder what impact, if any, this lack of a formal endorsement from a major publication will have on the electorate's views and decisions.
In this era of deeply entrenched partisan divides, the stakes have never been higher, and for many, the absence of a clear endorsement serves as further evidence of how the media landscape continues to shift and evolve, often in unexpected directions.
Sources:
semafor.com
nypost.com
nypost.com
Latest News