There's free-speech and there's Bezos-approved free-speech...
It seems the message is beginning to sink in that the constant liberal media attacks on Trump, 'the right', Russia, and anyone daring to not denigrate any of these - is not welcome among most Americans... (as WSJ noted this week)...
Skepticism toward the media is most often associated with conservatives in Middle America, some of whom eat something other than artisanal sandwiches.
But this week brings more evidence that investors worldwide have become very reluctant to buy what many established news organizations are selling.
How else to explain the collective shrug of the shoulders in financial markets to the latest breathless media reports about alleged collusion between the 2016 Trump campaign and Russia?
Because Jeff Bezos, owner of The Washington Post, has instituted a new policy with regard employees' social media behavior...
A new social-media policy at the Washington Post prohibits conduct on social media that “adversely affects The Post’s customers, advertisers, subscribers, vendors, suppliers or partners.”
In such cases, Post management reserves the right to take disciplinary action “up to and including termination of employment.”
As The Wall Street Journal reports, Mr. Bezos has introduced many innovations since taking over the principal newspaper of the nation’s capital, but he should rethink this one. His paper’s new social-media policy specifically lists the following among the types of communications which are now prohibited:
Disparaging the products and services of The Post’s advertisers, subscribers, competitors, business partners or vendors.
So the Post is encouraging at least minimally respectful treatment of some companies, but businesses that neither cooperate nor compete with the Post are fair game? This type of double standard is incompatible with the healthy practice of journalism.
The Post says that this new policy, which took effect on May 1 of this year, is the first formal social-media policy directed at the whole company and is meant to build on a newsroom policy from 2011. But back then, the pre-Bezos newsroom editors were not telling anyone to lay off business partners.
To say the least, it would not be easy to do journalism if reporters were barred from doing anything that adversely affects anyone with whom a news organization does business. And social media comprises increasingly important journalistic platforms, especially for the Post.
However, it seems that revenues trump freedom of speech in a Bezos world? But we thought Trump was the 'fascist'?