Unlocking Jeff Bezos’ Vision: What His Goals for The Washington Post Mean for Readers

Subscribe to the Slatest for insightful analysis and advice delivered daily right to your inbox.

In February 2017, the Washington Post introduced its first official slogan: “Democracy Dies in Darkness.” It came across a bit bold and self-important, almost like saying, “Without us, you’re in trouble.” Other media outlets, including Slate, made fun of it. Yet, over the years, the Post seemed to live up to its motto, shining light on a troubled presidency and its questionable practices. Under the leadership of Marty Baron and owner Jeff Bezos, the paper thrived during Trump’s first term, attracting an influx of subscribers who wanted accountability. From uncovering Trump’s charitable claims to delving into Russian election interference, the Post produced significant journalism, arguably its best since the Watergate scandal.

The Post’s focus on Trump wasn’t just about hype; it was about covering a key story of the time. His misdeeds were central to American politics, and as the local paper of record, the Post had to report it. For Bezos, that focus was also good for business. Reports showed that the paper turned its fortunes around post-2016, going from losses to profitability in just a couple of years. As Trump left office in January 2021, optimism filled the air with the new president, Joe Biden, declaring that democracy had won. The Post undoubtedly played a part in that narrative.

Fast forward to 2025. Trump is back in the White House, and readers of the Washington Post are realizing that danger to democracy can come from more than just darkness; it can come from people like Jeff Bezos. The billionaire seems more interested in protecting his financial interests than defending democratic values. Recently, he has shifted the Post’s focus away from serious journalism and instead geared it toward avoiding conflict with Trump. Cuts to the editorial staff are revealing the deeper implications of this shift, especially at a time when the political landscape is challenging for Democrats.

Just last week, it was reported that Bezos plans to redirect the newspaper’s opinion section to highlight “personal liberty and free markets,” suggesting that it should cover fewer critical issues surrounding Trump’s administration. This approach feels like a significant change from the Post’s earlier commitment to scrutinizing power. Under Bezos, it seems the outlet has fallen into a cycle of decline, cutting jobs and attempting to shift narratives rather than focusing on robust reporting.

Many subscribers were disappointed after the Post editorial board decided not to endorse a presidential candidate for the first time, leading to a wave of cancellations. Furthermore, the introduction of a new motto, “Riveting Storytelling for All of America,” hints at a shift in values. This change implies that previous stories focusing on critical issues concerning Trump are now intended only for a certain audience.

The recent changes to the opinion section, including the resignation of its editor, suggest a troubling trend. It appears that Bezos sees the Post not just as a news organization but as a piece in a larger puzzle—a way to maintain favor with Trump and safeguard his business ventures. This transition raises questions about the future of the newspaper and the integrity of its journalism.

Under Bezos’ ownership, the Washington Post faces a crucial crossroads. While it could provide extensive quality journalism with Bezos’ financial backing, the recent trend indicates a retreat from this ethos. Instead of fostering a robust reporting environment, changes seem aimed at appeasing interests that might come at the cost of journalistic integrity.

Bezos’ interests lie not only in media but also in his expansive business empire, including Amazon. The recent shifts in Washington appear to present a dual opportunity and challenge for him. With Trump’s administration reshaping the federal government, Bezos may seek to fill the void left behind, steering clear of conflicts that could jeopardize his other business interests.

The landscape has drastically changed since Trump’s first term. Back then, many were surprised by his election, and businesses mostly stood against him. Now, the landscape has shifted, and new opportunities for profit are emerging. Many powerful figures in business may look to adapt their strategies to align with the changing political environment, raising ongoing concerns about the health of democracy.