The concept of newspapers coming out with endorsements of political candidates is something that has always eluded me. Does it not arrive as slanted for a news outlet to lend its support for one over others, and therefore reflect on the approach to coverage of said candidates? This is not a new expression for me; I first had these thoughts around my high school years, seeing the local paper promoting certain names and wondering how this affected the claim of unbiased reporting they supposedly provide. 

But there I was, young and idealistic, thinking that the platitudes delivered in the press stating how they were looking out for the best interests of the general public was their genuine intention. (Was I ever that young?!) It took me quite a few years to let go of that concept, despite the overwhelming amount of evidence to the contrary. I guess I never wanted to lose faith in a noble journalism industry, like those holding out hope for “Firefly” to be brought back to television…or ever-hopeful New York Jets fans.

Let’s just address things with full candor: The year 2024 has been remarkable for the way the journalism complex in this country has completely tossed away any claim to objectivity. We have long known of the bias in the news industry, but this year has become one where journalists and outlets seemingly no longer care that we see the blatant partisanship. They have become so unmoored that they cannot control the narratives they have devolved to the point of brazenly lecturing us, supposedly for our own good.

This year alone, we have seen the press announce that our financial strife was imagined, defend plagiarism numerous times, tell us to our faces the video evidence of Joe Biden’s decrepitude was a lie, and completely rewrite the Kamala Harris resume, all while telling us Donald Trump will kill off America. In so doing, they have rendered the term “Fascist” to be completely meaningless. And each time the evidence of their malpractice is laid out, they declare it to be intolerance by conservatives that anyone dared notice what they are doing.

The latest proof of this comes in the form of two major newspapers, on opposite coasts, experiencing inner upheaval over the fact that a decision was handed down for their outlet to forgo making a formal presidential endorsement. This hysterical aftermath underscores both the hardcore slanted bias in the press and the complete dysfunction they have invited into their newsrooms. It is almost mystifying to watch playing out.

First was the announcement that the Los Angeles Times would not issue an endorsement. This generated the kind of clothes-rendering shrieking one would expect from a Telenovela. A number of editors and board members have already resigned. This is something taking place at a paper that has been bleeding money as if harpooned and dumped 20 percent of its newsroom in January, meaning a likely response to this exodus was, “Damn, we should have thought of this sooner!”

READ MORE: WHOA! Kamala Harris Loses a Huge Home State Endorsement

Requiem for a Rag: The LA Times Implodes Over the 'Non-Endorsement' of Harris

The real humor was that as staffers were treating this with an import on par with Gavin Newsom making an executive order that outlawed movie productions in the state, the general public could not feel enough apathy. Nobody gave a good damn that previously unknown executives were quitting a paper they stopped reading years earlier. Then more melodrama arrived.

Right behind that “shock”, the Washington Post reported it too would not be backing a candidate this election. The staff reflected on this with the calm, introspective demeanor of sage minds to explore the miasma of our political environment. Wait, wait – sorry: FAKE NEWS. They have behaved as if their editors told them they could not cover the Taylor Swift Eras Tour and they will no longer have season tickets to the Washington Mystics. 

The WaPo staffers have collectively been acting as if not rendering a presidential preference has become an unacceptable offense to journalism, with staff resignations taking place and complete outrage coming from those too brave to actually quit their jobs or even send a message to owner Jeff Bezos by canceling their Amazon Prime account. What has been a hilarious side note is a dose of unintended consequences for their wailing.

Washington Post readers, in a form of solidarity for all of the claims of this decision being one of the worst editorial actions ever taken by a news outlet (please), have been canceling their subscriptions. The “Oh no, Oh hell” realization has been remarkable, and delivers one hilarious example. 

Writer Caroline Kitchener came out with a plea for readers not to go the route of canceling because - imagine this - it would become bad for the staffers! Huh. Who would have thought that tearing down the integrity of your own publication would inspire people to think that it is no longer worthy of your time and money?! (Answer: Most unemotional common-sense thinkers.) But the best is what inspired her to write this corrective appeal: Her own mother canceled her WaPo subscription!

My mom just told me she cancelled her subscription to The Washington Post. She reads every one of my stories. It was a heartbreaking call.

I understand why she did it, but I asked her to reconsider. To anyone who has cancelled or is thinking about cancelling, here’s what I said:

— Caroline Kitchener (@CAKitchener) October 26, 2024

Given that Kitchener is a pro-abortion writer, she should feel a little better about this once she realizes that her mother simply terminated her subscription. 

More: Cry Me a River: WaPo Abortion Columnist Sheds Triggered Tears After Mom Cancels Subscription

But the drones of democracy at WaPo can take some solace; they are not alone. One brave soul - one name above all others has stepped up to grab the mantle of propriety, decency, and the preservation of our cherished foundational principles and has boldly come out on the pages and screens of the Washington Post to direct the (remaining) readership on the pathways to voting rectitude: Humor writer Alexandra Petri.

It has fallen to me, the humor columnist, to endorse Harris for president https://t.co/SEp8OnLVGl pic.twitter.com/nuRbBIKP3C

— Alexandra Petri (@petridishes) October 26, 2024

Of course, there is a litany of jokes to be had that Kamala Harris is backed by a humor writer. But that any staffer at WaPo thinks any of this is significant is the real laugher. We have known full well who this paper is backing. In its years of endorsing candidates, since the 1970s, the Washington Post has NEVER endorsed a Republican for president. Not once. But we are to believe that not endorsing Kamala somehow renders the journalistic tradition of this outlet.

Be calmed, anxiety-ridden journos and editors tossed into a cloud of dysphoria, we have not lost your true intentions. We simply need only to read your pages to see where your thoughts and hearts come to rest. The Democrats will be eternally in your debt for your diligence and dedication to their party.