LA Times Editorial Editor: I QUIT

It's all because the billionaire owner of the paper, clearly a Trumper, refused to let the Editorial Board publish an endorsement of Harris.

She took one for the country she loves, good for her.

From the AP article:

[quote]In a post on the social media platform X that did not directly mention the resignation, LA Times owner Patrick Soon-Shiong said the board was asked to do a factual analysis of the policies of Harris and Republican former President Donald Trump during their time at the White House.

[quote]Additionally, “The board was asked to provide (its) understanding of the policies and plans enunciated by the candidates during this campaign and its potential effect on the nation in the next four years,” he wrote. “In this way, with this clear and non-partisan information side-by-side, our readers could decide who would be worthy of being president for the next four years.”

The absurdity of this made me curious about Soon-Shiong's political background. He donated generously to Hillary Clinton's campaign but later met with Trump several times in an unsuccessful bid to secure a position in his administration. This decision was only about his personal ambition.

The Streisand Effect is now in full force.

Let the [italic]Los Angeles Times[/italic] know how you feel. The link takes you to a form which is to "Alert us to factual errors or share your thoughts about The Times' journalistic standards, practices and coverage." Share your thoughts!

[quote] LA Times owner Patrick Soon-Shiong

Oh my good friend Patty!

“ Trump’s campaign jumped on Garza’s departure, saying the state’s largest newspaper had declined to endorse the Democratic ticket after backing Harris in her previous races for U.S. Senate and state attorney general.”

How does the owner like that spin? Makes him look like a gullible fool.

Hmmmm: Should we endorse the rapist, felon, crook, wanna be fascist or the one who is trying to keep Democracy alive?

Hell yeah. That’s what I am talking about. Some motherfucking integrity.

This is not “sanewashing.”

Time for me to unsubscribe. I only get the digital version and I hardly ever read it, but this is unacceptable.

It’s been reported that the paper has published many editorials excoriating Trump and praising Harris, so there’s been no problem for the editorial board to show its political bent. It’s the publisher’s prerogative to decide if their paper will do an endorsement of an office or not. The editor decided she wanted to be dramatic about it.

No, R12, that's NOT the case. The publisher is a Trumper and he overrode the Editorial Board.

The editorial board must be independent , R12.

Why do papers endorse candidates in the first place? No one listens or reads them. Who cares? This is the legacy media you speak so badly about.

R15 The West Virginia Herald/Klan Today endorsed me.

The editorial board is not independent of the owner of a newspaper. He has the right to say “don’t publish that” and editors reporters and readers have to right to react to that decision as they see fit.

People are saying what’s the big heal. So a paper that has historically endorsed democratic candidates chooses THIS election to sit one out. THIS ELECTION. THIS ELECTION.

BYE FELICIA

R18, no, you’re pulling that out of your ass.

The big heal? Sounds like you, R19.

r19 The big "heal" is that, their having endorsed Democrats in the past as you state, to withhold an endorsement at this time makes it appear to the readership as if they now have very grave doubts about Harris' suitability relative to Trump's suitability.

Deal*

The editors did not decide not to endorse this time around--the new Trumper billionaire publisher decided not to, for obvious reasons. This is in no way on the Editorial Board.

R22 👏

You’re talking to yourself again, dear.

[quote] [R18], no, you’re pulling that out of your ass.

To the contrary, you are pulling the idea that a newspaper’s editorial board does not answer to its owner out of YOUR ass, as the fact that the editorial was not published demonstrates.

Does anyone read this rag?

R26 who you talking 2?

dleos91745

17h17 hours ago

Congrats to the LA Times for breaking the record for most canceled subscriptions in one day! Woo Hoo!

[quote]It’s the publisher’s prerogative to decide if their paper will do an endorsement of an office or not.

True, but the fact that the LA Times refuses to endorse a NATIVE CALIFORNIAN for president – in one of the nation's most liberal large cities – is simply batshit. I'd expect this kind of shit from the NY Post or Washington Examiner, not one of America's largest daily papers.

[quote]The editor decided she wanted to be dramatic about it.

Yes, trollerina, it was only about "drama." 🙄 Lemme guess: you also have no problem with victim-blaming?

The NY Times is taking the more cowardly, duplicitous route and publishing 1000 proTrump articles and then they’ll do a proHarris endorsement on a page few read.

That is simply false. The Times has been fairly criticized for some “sanewashing” of Trump’s speeches, but they do not publish pro-Trump articles. They have published a string of anti-Trump editorials.

Today’s Times lead story

[quote] Today’s Times lead story

Yes, the NYT stating that Trump will expand and toughen immigration enforcement will help him politically, but I don’t believe that the NYT intended that.

I’m not sure what kind of mind sees that story as a positive for Trump, especially among NY Times readers.

dear sheeples, I will no longer be your catcher in the rye

[quote] In a post on the social media platform X that did not directly mention the resignation, LA Times owner Patrick Soon-Shiong said the board was asked to do a factual analysis of the policies of Harris and Republican former President Donald Trump during their time at the White House.

[quote] Additionally, “The board was asked to provide (its) understanding of the policies and plans enunciated by the candidates during this campaign and its potential effect on the nation in the next four years,” he wrote. “In this way, with this clear and non-partisan information side-by-side, our readers could decide who would be worthy of being president for the next four years.”

Sounds more like Patty was trying a bit of both-sidesism. I don’t know that much about him or his motives, but I hardly think it was a genuine attempt to portray each candidate in a fair light.

Yeah, this guy can go fuck himself!

I admire the editor. Good for her! The LA Times has just destroyed its own reputation.

Mad respect for her. It takes balls to do that.

A lot of CEOs are going to be afraid of what Trump will do to their businesses if he wins. They know he will lawlessly extract revenge any way he can—tax audits, anti-trust investigations, loss of government contracts, etc. Most people are cowards.

Cunts!

R41, the press cannot traffic in fear of what Dump might attempt to do in retaliation, otherwise it's truly game over. Anyway, this publisher is only servicing himself, as has been his history.

The city's magazine steps up where its newspaper failed.

Soon-Shiong is from South Africa.

I can only assume, Soon-Shiong, worth 6.1 Billion, is the blame. Totally worthless tidbit: his wife is a retired actress with roles such as "an impersonator of MacGyver's daughter on the original "MacGyver", appearing on"Hotel" and Canadian TV's 'Danger Bay". They live in US and South Africa.

Just canceled my subscription, not that it will make much of a difference.

[quote] Just canceled my subscription

You did the right thing, even if this brouhaha hadn’t happened. It’s time to shutter print news relics.

[quote]It takes balls to do that.

Especially when there are so few newspaper jobs left.

[quote] It’s time to shutter print news relics.

No, it isn't, R48. We need all the legit news in all its forms that we can get.

[quote] We need all the legit news in all its forms that we can get.

Well, grandpa, you’re apparently already on the internet, and it shouldn’t be too hard to find someone to show you how to access the online versions.

She said BYE BITCH!

Cunt R51, if you don't see the relevance of news in both print and digital forms, you probably don't see the need for owning actual books, either, because you're too fucking stupid.

R51 doesn't read actual books--she doesn't have the attention span.

R50 is right, we still need newspapers.

Of course we do. Why would we not want every conceivable form of legitimate news sources?

^

[quote]Hey, @washingtonpost , you can’t say “democracy dies in darkness” while you’re busy turning off the lights

[quote] Hell yeah. That’s what I am talking about. Some motherfucking integrity.

Mafuckin!’

Youz wusnt razed rite.

Orange is a successful media personality.The media is protecting their own.

Never forget. Ever.

More editors exit LA Times:

Dr. We Too Low is an embarrassment and should be forced to revisit his strong-arming of the Ed Board.

[quote]It's all because the billionaire owner of the paper, clearly a Trumper, refused to let the Editorial Board publish an endorsement of Harris.

Then he should say so and stand in his truth.

So damn sick of these billionaires who clearly are up to no good, throwing rocks and hiding their hands. "Oooooooo hey don't.look at ME; it was the EDITORIAL BOARD!"

And when that doesn't work he'll show another rock from a different direction... again hiding his hand. ANYTHING to keep from being D R A G G E D into a confession of truth.

The owner obviously told the editor of the Letters section not to run any correspondence on the endorsement question, as today there are zero letters on that subject.

Surely alongside the hemorrhaging of subscribers some advertisers have canceled their ads in the [italic] LA Times [/italic] as well. Is there any place where we can find updated figures on these cancellations (subscribers and advertisers)?

This newspaper, as with all newspapers, was already in a tottering condition. Look for more cost-cutting and cutbacks.

[quote] This newspaper, as with all newspapers, was already in a tottering condition. Look for more cost-cutting and cutbacks.

If staffers who publicly criticized the paper end up getting canned because of the cancellations, they’ll learn to consider the consequences before they act rashly.

Los Angeles Times Editorial Writer: Why I Resigned Over the Endorsement Call:

Now he's blocking the paper from criticizing Trump's cabinet picks

Freedom of speech until it offends authoritarians.

Unbelievable. He shouldn't own any media news source.

LA Times has been RIGHT WING for ages. Not really a surprise. Just because it says LA on the cover does not mean it's a progressive or liberal leaning new outlet. It gets thrown in there with "Hollywood elite" rhetoric that Repugs like to repeat. LA times being fair and balanced is anything but that.

How many people would buy a company and then say, "Dear employees, just do whatever you feel like doing and I won't say anything about it"? I believe that most people, if they bought a news company, would steer it in some way. There are many better investments than newspapers if want to be hands-off.

Dr. Shit - Shiong can fuck right off.

America has been sold to and is owned by the global right wing

In the past week I see Harry Litman has finished up there too.

Living in LA I actually don't know anyone who still reads the LA times. Maybe 30 years ago, but it's not a thing among locals. That includes online.