"I'm writing to let you know about a change coming to our opinion pages. We are going to be writing every day in support and defense of two pillars: personal liberties and free markets. We'll cover other topics too, of course, but viewpoints opposing those pillars will be left to be published by others.
"There was a time when a newspaper, especially one that was a local monopoly, might have seen it as a service to bring to the reader's doorstep every morning a broad-based opinion section that sought to cover all views. Today, the Internet does that job.
"I am of America and for America, and proud to be so. Our country did not get here by being typical. A big part of America's success has been freedom in the economic realm and everywhere else. Freedom is ethical--it minimizes coercion--and practical--it drives creativity, invention, and prosperity.
"I offered David Shipley, whom I greatly admire, the opportunity to lead this new chapter. I suggested to him that if the answer wasn't 'hell yes,' then it had to be 'no.' After careful consideration, David decided to step away. This is a significant shift; it won't be easy, and it will require 100 percent commitment--I respect his decision. We'll be searching for a new Opinion Editor to own this new direction.
"I'm confident that free markets and personal liberties are right for America. I also believe these viewpoints are underserved in the current market of ideas and news opinion. I'm excited for us together to fill that void."
--Jeff Bezos, owner of
The Washington Post
The owner and publisher of The Washington Post has every right to run the outfit how he sees fit. This past week, he even was praised for the post above, in some quarters. In other quarters, not so much. Lordy, you should see the comments on the inside-baseball media chat groups.
But Mr. Bezos bought The Post fair and square. He can run his opinion pages the way he wants to run his opinion pages. That's how a free press works. What a country!
Though we have to say, it's a bad business decision.
Limiting your opinion writers to the defense of personal liberty and free markets? That should be something to tell your editorialists (we do) but the whole opinion section? Does this include columnists? (Post employees think so.) And guest columnists? What about letter writers, who can be all over the place, sometimes in the same sentence?
Placing handcuffs on an opinion section in this way seems likely to make an opinion section overly one-sided, as Mr. Bezos himself implies. Or we infer, from his "viewpoints opposing those pillars will be left to be published by others."
To make an opinion section one-sided would seem to give readers another reason not to consume his product. Newspapers are already fighting against the Internet for attention, and now The Post seems to have surrendered half the field. Does the paper really think this will help it get more readers, when there are thousands of echo chambers already pinging around out there?
This newspaper will continue to run columnists with all kinds of points of view. Guest columns and letters, too. Even opinion that we find repulsive sometimes. We remember what Paul Greenberg wrote about that years ago, when he was criticized for publishing a letter that was unseemly to the more pure among us:
"When it comes to judging prose, one man's hatred can be another's eloquence. We print a wide variety of communications in the Letters column, including those critical of the paper and its offerings . . . . The paper does need to draw the line at some things, like obscenity and libel, but if the editor began censoring letters on the basis of highly subjective judgments like racism or hatred, or the politically incorrect in general, where would it stop? Start gagging folks who strike us as racist (a category that, like communist and fascist, has become less a description than a general epithet) and where will it end? Soon we'll be drawing the line at the prohibitionists and vegetarians among us . . . and that would be a pity. Because the Letters column is not intended to depict Arkansas as a state populated entirely by passionless people who could have walked out of a Dick-and-Jane reader. Which would be the result soon enough if the paper treated the Letters column as some kind of exercise in PR, and excluded all opinions likely to offend somebody somewhere. A rigorous censorship may begin on the fringes of opinion, but once encouraged it spreads with alacrity, and soon chills the expression of even mainstream opinions. A good Letters column should serve as a sounding board for all kinds of ideas. And if readers find some of those notions ugly and offensive, let us remember that boils may need to be lanced, not disguised. Just as pressure may need to be released, not bottled up. It is a matter of faith with us--and experience, too--that the best way to fight bad ideas is to expose them openly, and invite better ones. Our hope is that the Letters column will represent Arkansas as she is--the good and bad, noble and base--so we can all grow better through an honest exchange of opinion.
Paul always did put things best.
We'd include "columnists" in Paul's thoughts above, but doubtless he didn't mention columnists because he probably never thought that a newspaper's opinion page would limit its columns the way The Post has chosen to do.
We sometimes think of the best opinion sections as great meals served in great restaurants. The diner should have a whole smorgasbord to choose from. Meaty entrees, healthy veggies, delightful desserts. Or George Will, guest columns from doctors, and letters about your favorite dog. John Brummett mixed with Bradley Gitz, and the latest PETA guest writer mixed with Bret Stephens. And throw in some John Deering 'toons for garnish.
Why, to limit the range of viewpoints on an opinion page seems to push the paper into cable news territory; that is, providing one perspective and ignoring much of another. Besides, reading an opposing viewpoint never hurt anybody. And it doesn't always change minds anyway; sometimes it reinforces an opinion.
For example, we love to read opinions by those against personal liberties and free markets (see Mr. Bezos' statement above). Because almost always, those opinions reinforce the ones we have. Even if unintentionally.
Now, please enjoy your meal; er, your opinion section(s). And if you find one particular server constantly offers glazed beets, we don't mind if you skip that one and move on to the ice cream. Here, we want to provide it all. Better that way, if it keeps bringing you back for seconds.