USA Today and over 200 other newspapers by Gannett have chosen not to endorse a candidate

[Social Media]

 

In a notable shift, USA Today and over 200 other newspapers owned by Gannett have chosen not to endorse a candidate in the upcoming presidential election. This move aligns with decisions from other major publications, such as the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times, which have also decided to forgo endorsements. “None of the USA Today Network publications are endorsing in presidential or national races,” confirmed Lark-Marie Antón, spokesperson for USA Today, in an interview with The Hill.

 

While Gannett’s publications are refraining from backing candidates in national races, Antón clarified that they still retain the “discretion” to endorse at state or local levels. She explained that some newspapers may opt to endorse key issues impacting their communities rather than individual candidates. “Many have decided not to endorse individual candidates, but rather, endorse key local and state issues on the ballot that impact the community,” said Antón. “Why are we doing this? Because we believe America’s future is decided locally — one race at a time,” she added. With over 200 publications spread across the nation, Gannett aims to serve readers by providing them with “the facts that matter and the trusted information they need to make informed decisions.”

 

Gannett’s decision is particularly significant given the company’s ownership of influential papers in swing states, such as the Arizona Republic and the Detroit Free Press, where endorsements have the potential to sway voters. The Washington Post, owned by Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, has faced backlash for its own decision to stay silent on the presidential endorsement front. In an op-ed published on Monday, Bezos defended the move, calling it “right” and “principled,” and dismissed speculation that it was motivated by business interests. The decision has led to significant fallout, with NPR reporting on Monday that more than 200,000 people canceled their subscriptions to the Washington Post, citing “two people at the paper with knowledge of internal matters.”

 

Bezos expressed regret over the timing of the decision, which he believes should have been made sooner. “Ending [endorsements] is a principled decision, and it’s the right one,” he wrote, adding, “I wish this decision to end presidential endorsements had been made earlier, in a moment further from the election and the emotions around it. That was inadequate planning, and not some intentional strategy.”

 

The Los Angeles Times also recently announced it would not be endorsing a candidate, acknowledging that the decision has led to a loss of subscribers. Despite the reactions, these major outlets appear firm in their belief that withholding endorsements offers readers an unbiased platform at a time when media credibility is often questioned.

 

Based on a report by NYP 2024-10-31

 

 

 

[spidermike007]

They know Trump is a nasty piece of work, and very much a gangster type, and if elected they would be on his "enemy list". So, best to avoid that fate. 

[mdr224]

2 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

They know Trump is a nasty piece of work, and very much a gangster type, and if elected they would be on his "enemy list". So, best to avoid that fate. 

Trump derangement syndrome until your last breath

[spidermike007]

3 minutes ago, mdr224 said:

Trump derangement syndrome until your last breath

T** means Trump deceives his supporters. You are living proof. 

Edited October 30 by spidermike007

[Tug]

4 minutes ago, mdr224 said:

Trump derangement syndrome until your last breath

We have eyes and ears we don’t forget nor forgive.

[thesetat2013]

12 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

They know Trump is a nasty piece of work, and very much a gangster type, and if elected they would be on his "enemy list". So, best to avoid that fate. 

They also know Harris should not be President and is not really a politician. Otherwise they would choose one of them. The race is too close to say who will actually win. But they did not endorse Trump before so your reasoning does not make sense. They suffered no repercussions previously for not endorsing Trump

 

[thesetat2013]

6 minutes ago, Tug said:

We have eyes and ears we don’t forget nor forgive.

Agree, imagine what they will look like if Harris wins and destroys the country. Their endorsements will be thrown in their faces and have to accept partial blame. 

[Cryingdick]

Nobody wants to touch Kamal with a ten foot pole, with a condom on, while they are on the john-Eminem

[Tug]

1 hour ago, thesetat2013 said:

Agree, imagine what they will look like if Harris wins and destroys the country. Their endorsements will be thrown in their faces and have to accept partial blame. 

Care to elaborate how Harris is going to (destroy the country) I’m all ears 👂 

[spidermike007]

1 hour ago, thesetat2013 said:

They also know Harris should not be President and is not really a politician. Otherwise they would choose one of them. The race is too close to say who will actually win. But they did not endorse Trump before so your reasoning does not make sense. They suffered no repercussions previously for not endorsing Trump

 

A second term will embolden Trump to be far more willing to step over many, many lines, and behave more like a dictator and a ruthless gangster, seeking revenge against his perceived enemies. He has stated those kinds of intentions. This is a highly insecure and very unstable man. Harris is not ideal. But, I think she is the far less dangerous choice. Trump is the true fascist. 

[JonnyF]

It's a smart move. American politics is so divided and vitriolic that endorsing one of the candidates would mean a huge loss of revenue from the other side. 

 

Plus, even Democrats are finding it increasingly difficult to endorse Harris. 

 

 

[biggles45]

" Trump is the true fascist. " 

 

Really, I thought it was Biden/Harris that weaponised the DOJ, FBI and other Law Enforcement branches against Trump 

[thesetat2013]

2 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

A second term will embolden Trump to be far more willing to step over many, many lines, and behave more like a dictator and a ruthless gangster, seeking revenge against his perceived enemies. He has stated those kinds of intentions. This is a highly insecure and very unstable man. Harris is not ideal. But, I think she is the far less dangerous choice. Trump is the true fascist. 

You are making  lot of suppositions and guesses without any facts to support this. If he is elected he still needs to go through the proper procedures getting laws changed or doing things in the government. He can not attack anyone like you think without repercussions.. he can not become a dictator.. The constitution protects us from that happening. He can not change the constitution either without congress and other government officials agreeing as well. Everything you said is just Democratic mumbo jumbo to make you think it is possible. 

[john donson]

bickering as if your vote counts...lol

[Cryingdick]

Kamala a candidate so bad she only makes a footnote in history books as the candidate that was so egregious newspapers quit all endorsements for good.