Connect with us

Washington

Turbulence At Washington Post With Pressure For Profit From Jeff Bezos

Published

on

Turbulence At Washington Post With Pressure For Profit From Jeff Bezos


The Post’s managing editor resigned while a boss has been targeted in the paper’s columns

New York:

The prestigious Washington Post is in crisis, with pressure on from owner Jeff Bezos to change its money-losing ways.

Advertisement

The Post’s managing editor abruptly resigned; a chosen successor withdrew under fire, and a boss has been targeted in the newspaper’s columns.

At the heart of the storm is “WaPo”‘s new CEO, Briton William Lewis, who was given a mission by Amazon founder Bezos when he appointed him last autumn.

Lewis was asked to turn around a newspaper that continues to pile up Pulitzer Prizes half a century after the Watergate scandal it instigated, but which has lost $77 million in 2023 despite job cuts and the disappearance of its Sunday supplement.

However, the former journalist, who made history in the late 2000s with a scoop on the expenses of British MPs when he was editor of the Daily Telegraph, is finding his position increasingly vulnerable.

For weeks now, revelations have multiplied about his role, when he was working for the Murdoch family’s conservative media group about 12 years ago, in a scandal of illegal phone tapping by the tabloid The News of the World.

Advertisement

On Friday, Lewis was at the center of an investigation by his own journalists.

According to the Washington Post, he gave the go-ahead in 2011 for the destruction of thousands of emails, fueling suspicions that he was destroying evidence, which he denies.

“Trump Bump”

As the US presidential election approaches, the affair is poisoning the atmosphere at a long-vaunted newspaper that is “not doing well economically,” Northeastern University journalism professor Dan Kennedy tells AFP.

The Post was among trusted news outlets that benefited from the upheaval that marked Trump’s four years in the White House which ended with his loss to President Joe Biden.

Advertisement

The Post “was seen as a place that offered really tough, truth-telling coverage” of Trump, according to the professor.

Trump’s departure from the White House meant fewer attention-grabbing stories to keep readers engaged.

“When Donald Trump left the White House, the Trump bump that helped a lot of newspapers disappeared,” Kennedy said.

“And the Post was hit especially hard.”

By the end of 2022, the Post would have 2.5 million subscribers compared with 3 million subscribers when Biden took office in early 2021, according to the Wall Street Journal.

Advertisement

Meanwhile, rival New York Times has grown to more than 10 million subscribers, the fruit of a strategy to diversify into fun topics such as games, food, and lifestyle while still serving up hard news.

US media quoted Lewis as telling editorial staff in early June that he “can’t sugarcoat it anymore” — the paper has lost a lot of money and people’s interest in its articles.

Third News Team

The day before that editorial meeting, Post journalists learned of the resignation of editor-in-chief Sally Buzbee.

Buzbee is said to have disagreed with Lewis’s strategy to split the editorial department into three divisions: news, opinion, and a new third unit devoted to social media and service journalism.

Advertisement

The contours of this “third newsroom” remain unclear, but it seems aimed at reviving readership in a leap into the unknown for the newspaper.

Within the Murdoch family group, Lewis was the boss of the Wall Street Journal (2014-2020), another flagship of the US press.

However, articles in the New York Times and the Post pointed to questionable methods employed under his watch and that of former colleague Robert Winnett, whom Lewis chose to replace Buzbee.

Published allegations include paying informants, using data from hacked phones, or intermediaries using phony identification to get information.

Winnett withdrew from consideration for the post following those revelations.

Advertisement

Professor Kennedy believes Lewis has no choice but to leave the Post because he has lost the confidence of the team there.

“The body is rejecting the transfusion,” Post veteran David Maraniss wrote on his Facebook page, adding he didn’t know anyone who thinks the situation can stand as it is.

“If he can’t inspire the staff (…) the Post will sail without direction and its best people will leave,” Kennedy said of Lewis.

For many observers, the outcome of the crisis lies in the hands of billionaire Bezos, who bought the Post for $250 million in 2013.

So far, Bezos has backed his CEO.

Advertisement

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)



Source link

Washington

Love Actually? Washington’s current relationship with Britain is more like Contempt Actually | Timothy Garton Ash

Published

on

Love Actually? Washington’s current relationship with Britain is more like Contempt Actually | Timothy Garton Ash


“A friend who bullies us is no longer a friend. And since bullies only respond to strength, from now onward, I will be prepared to be much stronger. And the president should be prepared for that.” Thus spoke Hugh Grant, playing the British prime minister confronting the US president in a famous scene in the romcom Love Actually. Real-life British prime minister Keir Starmer has attempted to stand up ever so slightly to the current bully in the White House over the latest US war in the Middle East. Despite the British government’s right-royal efforts to flatter Donald Trump ever since he was elected US president, his response to Starmer’s little attempt has been a torrent of contempt. So the reality is not Love Actually. It’s Contempt Actually.

Asked about the British government’s subtle distinction between defensive strikes in the Gulf, which it now supports, and offensive ones, which it doesn’t, Maga ideologue Steve Bannon tells the New Statesman’s Freddie Hayward: “That’s diplomatic bullshit. Fuck you. You’re either an ally or you’re not. Fuck you. The special relationship is over.” Ah, the “special relationship”! It must be 40 years since I first heard former West German chancellor Helmut Schmidt say: “The special relationship is so special only one side knows it exists.”

An American critic of Trump recently asked me the obvious follow-up question: “Why does your government keep grovelling?” More fundamentally, we must ask why so much of official Britain, and especially its security establishment, keeps clinging for dear life to the United States, behaving for all the world like someone stuck in an abusive personal relationship.

To be fair, a lot of other European leaders have spent much of the past year sacrificing their dignity as they suck up to Trump, condoning his trashing of everything that liberal Europe has stood for since 1945. Mark Rutte, the secretary general of Nato, would beat Starmer to win Private Eye’s premier satirical medal, the OBN (Order of the Brown Nose). The reasons for this sycophancy are obvious: Europe’s dependence on the US for supporting Ukraine, for our own security in Nato and, to a significant degree, for our prosperity. But there’s a particular, rather pathetic desperation about the way the British cling to Uncle Sam.

Advertisement

The explanation? History, of course. The US founding fathers grew up thinking of themselves as Englishmen. From 1776 to 1917, when the US entered the first world war, this was, as the historian Robert Saunders nicely puts it, not so much a special as a peculiar relationship. The US defined itself historically against Britain, but there was a mutual fascination. Following the brief but important military alliance in 1917-18, and the subsequent peacemaking in Paris, the US withdrew from Europe.

A special relationship really did exist between 1941, when Winston Churchill managed – with a little help from the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor – to bring the US into the war against Adolf Hitler, and 1956, when the US humiliatingly stopped Britain and France from retaking the Suez canal. The UK and the US were not equals, but this was still a real power partnership, jointly shaping Europe, if not the world.

Trump v Starmer: will the special relationship survive? – The Latest

France and Britain drew sharply contrasting conclusions from their humiliation over Suez. France, under president Charles de Gaulle, built its own independent nuclear deterrent and had already identified the goal that the current French president, Emmanuel Macron, calls European strategic autonomy. Britain, after a brief period of angry alienation from Washington, doubled down on prioritising its relationship with the US. If we could no longer be a great power ourselves, we would be “Athens to America’s Rome”.

Unlike France, Britain built a nuclear deterrent that was and remains technologically dependent on the US, and always put Nato before European construction. In many ways, the British-American relationship did get closer: in intelligence and military cooperation, in academia and media, in finance and the economy (today the UK is the top destination of US direct investment, just ahead of the Netherlands). But at the same time, Britain’s political influence in Washington was steadily diminishing. It clung to it all the more.

Advertisement

The late British Labour politician Robin Cook reported in his memoirs how, in a crucial cabinet debate in the run-up to the Iraq war, then prime minister Tony Blair said: “I tell you that we must steer close to America. If we don’t, we will lose our influence to shape what they do.” But how much influence was there really?

Today, Blair’s former chief of staff Jonathan Powell sits at Starmer’s right hand in 10 Downing Street, trying to do the same with the Trumpians. “We have those relationships so we can have those difficult conversations,” says an anonymous Whitehall source. But the conversations are not difficult for Washington. They are for London, because it has so little clout left.

This trend has been exacerbated by two other developments. The first is the decline of Britain’s armed forces. American soldiers who spent years fighting alongside the British now tell me, with something more like pity than contempt: “You barely have an army any more.” In the current conflict, France got a naval ship to Cyprus before Britain did, although it was a British military base on Cyprus that was attacked by Iran. This weakness, too, finds its echo in popular culture. In the latest season of the Netflix political soap The Diplomat, the saturnine US vice-president (brilliantly played by Rufus Sewell) riffs off the children’s book The Little Engine That Could to describe Britain as “the little island that couldn’t”. Ouch.

The second is Brexit. It’s just blindingly obvious that the UK is less important to the US than it used to be because it’s no longer part of a larger bloc. In Blair’s time, for all the long-term waning of influence, Britain still had two relatively strong legs: the transatlantic one and, as a member of the EU, the European one. In 2016, in what we can today see even more clearly was an act of monumental stupidity, Britain chose to cut off its own European leg. Now Trump is cutting the American one.

Here’s the other reason for Britain’s peculiar, rather pathetic desperation. Unlike France or Germany, it doesn’t have another leg to stand on.

Advertisement

For anyone who loves this country, it’s painful to see how it has reduced itself to being an object of contempt – or at best, pity. Fortunately, there is a path back to self-respect and being respected. While keeping the best possible relations with the US, Britain can set a strategic course towards being a core part of a stronger Europe. This means helping to build up European defence, especially through the Europeanisation of Nato, and it means – as London’s mayor, Sadiq Khan, has just usefully suggested – rejoining the EU. How this could be done, in a timeframe of five to 10 years, and whether it will be possible politically, on both sides of the Channel, are subjects for further columns. Watch this space.



Source link

Continue Reading

Washington

Polymarket opening ‘Situation Room’ pop-up bar in DC. See when.

Published

on

Polymarket opening ‘Situation Room’ pop-up bar in DC. See when.


play

Prediction betting market platform Polymarket is opening a “Situation Room” pop-up bar in the nation’s capital that will be “dedicated to monitoring the situation.”

The company announced its latest business endeavor in an X post on Wednesday, March 18.

Advertisement

“Imagine a sports bar… but just for situation monitoring — live X feeds, flight radar, Bloomberg terminals, and Polymarket screens,” the company’s statement said.

The bar opens to the public in Washington, DC, on Friday, March 20, and will operate until Sunday, March 22. The Situation Room will open on 8 p.m. on March 20 and at 11 a.m. on March 21-22, according to Polymarket. The company did not specify how long the bar will remain open; however, Proper 21 K Street, where the pop-up is taking place, closes at 12 a.m. ET Monday-Sunday, according to its website.

Last month, Polymarket opened a free supermarket in New York City to promote free markets. Polymarket donated $1 million to Food Bank For NYC as part of its endeavor.

“Free groceries. Free markets. Built for the people who power New York,” the company said in an announcement.

Advertisement

What is Polymarket?

Polymarket allows users to bet on the outcomes of real-world events, everything from who will win the Academy Award for best actress to when the United States will confirm the existence of aliens.

Top trending bets on the platform on Friday, March 20, included whether the United States would invade Cuba in 2026 and who the 2028 Republican presidential nominee would be, among others.

Betting platform under scrutiny over ‘Situation Room’ name, more

Polymarket has come under intense scrutiny since its launch in 2020. In January, the Nevada Gaming Control Board filed a civil enforcement action against the company. In the complaint, the Board asked the court for a declaration and injunction to stop Polymarket from offering unlicensed wagering in violation of Nevada law.

Advertisement

However, Nevada isn’t the only entity trying to take the platform to court. Brett Bruen, the chief executive of the Global Situation Room, a public affairs agency, called the company out on X for allegedly using the organization’s trademarked name.

“We have @GlobalSitRoom & related terms trademarked (checks notes) …for tracking situations around the globe,” Bruen wrote. “Flattered, really – it’s a great name. But, no, you can’t use it. Yes, my lawyers will be in touch.”

Global Situation Room also sent a cease and desist letter to Polymarket, alleging that the company’s use of the “Situation Room” name gives a false impression that Global Situation Room is “somehow connected or associated with Polymarket’s services,” CNBC reported, citing a letter from the public relations agency.

“Indeed, there are obvious overlaps in the uses of GLOBAL SITUATION ROOM and THE SITUATION ROOM such as both marks include ‘SITUATION ROOM’ and allow consumers to monitor and act on global affairs,” the letter, written by Shane Delsman, an attorney at Milwaukee, Wisconsin-based law firm Godfrey & Kahn, reads. “In fact, the marks are so similar, Global Situation Room has already witnessed actual confusion in the form of press requests to comment on the opening of the new THE SITUATION ROOM bar.”

USA TODAY reached out to Polymarket for comment on March 20.

Advertisement

Michelle Del Rey is a trending news reporter at USA TODAY. Reach her at mdelrey@usatoday.com



Source link

Continue Reading

Washington

Devils Head to Nation’s Capital | PREVIEW | New Jersey Devils

Published

on

Devils Head to Nation’s Capital | PREVIEW | New Jersey Devils


THE SCOOP

The Devils opened their five-game road trip with a 6-3 victory at New York’s Madison Square Garden on Wednesday night. New Jersey’s faces Washington on the second leg that includes stops in Dallas, Nashville and Carolina.

New Jersey is now 7-2-0 in its past nine games. The Devils are enjoying an offensive explosion of late. During their past nine games, New Jersey has totaled 4.11 goals per game. And they’ve scored 10 power-play goals on 24 opportunities (42%).  

The Caps head into the back half of their season-long four-game homestand on Friday night when the New Jersey Devils make their second visit of the season to DC. Washington has earned at least a point in each of the first two games of the homestand, taking a 3-2 shootout loss to the Bruins last weekend before beating the Senators by a 4-1 count on Wednesday.

Wednesday’s win still leaves the Caps with less than a 10-percent chance of slinking their way into the Stanley Cup playoffs. With just 13 games remaining on the season, the Caps will likely need to win at least nine – and likely 10 or 11 – of those games to have a viable chance of getting in.

Advertisement

Rookie Cole Hutson, who made his NHL debut Wednesday night, also picked up his first career NHL goal with an empty-netter. Hutson was a second-round pick (43rd overall) in 2024.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending