As someone who has a great fondness for newspapers — I delivered them when I was a teenager, and, being mostly deaf now, I have to read the news, not watch it on television — I was greatly pleased when billionaire Jeff Bezos bought The Washington Post from the Graham family, which could no longer afford to keep it running, saving the newspaper from disaster. We previously noted that while Mr Bezos has a currently guesstimated net worth of $248.5 billion, a mere single-digit billionaire like Patrick Soon-Shiong, who owns The Los Angeles Times, and his paltry $8.1 billion had to cut costs as his newspaper was hemorrhaging money.
It seems, however, that while Mr Bezos can afford the money losses at the Post, he appears to have decided that he needs to reduce the blood loss.
Washington Post says one-third of its staff across all departments is being laid off
Staff members in the newsroom were told they would be getting emails with one of two subject lines, announcing that the person’s role has or hasn’t been eliminated.
Wednesday, February 4, 2026 | 9:57 AM EST | Updated: 10:19 AM EST
The Washington Post is laying off one-third of its staff in the newsroom and other departments, a brutal blow at one of journalism’s most legendary brands.
The troubled Post began implementing large-scale cutbacks on Wednesday, including eliminating its sports department and shrinking the number of journalists it stations overseas. The changes were announced by executive editor Matt Murray in a Zoom meeting with staff.
The staff reduction is a significant psychic blow at the Post, known in history books for its Watergate revelations and most recently for aggressive coverage of President Donald Trump’s cutbacks to the federal workforce, and for journalism in general.
Staff members in the newsroom were told they would be getting emails with one of two subject lines, announcing that the person’s role has or hasn’t been eliminated. A Post representative confirmed that one-third of the staff would be cut, without saying how many total employees the newspaper has.
I guess that my good friend Heather Long got out at the Post just in time, because she now works as the Chief Economist for Navy Federal Credit Union!
Sadly, this is not something unexpected: the Post had already been making cuts, and trying to meet Mr Bezos’ requirement that the newspaper try to break even. However, it was Mr Bezos’ decision not to allow the newspaper to endorse Kamala Harris Emhoff which cost the newspaper around a quarter million paying subscribers. Since the newspaper had obviously been supporting the then-Vice President in every way other than the spiked endorsement, I fail to see how letting the endorsement be made would have changed the election, but spiking it certainly cost the Post money.
Mr Bezos defended his decision in the pages of the newspaper, saying “We must be accurate, and we must be believed to be accurate,” but if the Post reported on its own layoffs, I did not see it on the newspaper’s website front page or in a search for layoffs.
Perhaps the newspaper should have read its own masthead tagline, because if “Democracy Dies in Darkness,” added as a protest to President Trump during his first term, is keeping the readership in darkness about the newspaper’s layoffs really that great an idea?
It would take someone with Mr Bezos’ money, as Dr Soon-Shiong’s worried have demonstrated, to buy the newspaper from him. I once suggested that he simply give the Post to his ex, Mackenzie Scott, net worth $30.8 billion, because she likes giving away her money, and, for newspaper owners today, giving away their money really is what they have to do.
Here’s the problem as I see it:
The Post has been hard left for a long, long time, but they did a pretty decent job of hiding it (or at least pretending to be “unbiased”) until about 30 years ago. In the late ’90’s, early 2k’s many news organizations started letting the mask slip, including the Post. They stopped even pretending to be objective…not all at once, but they slowly revealed themselves bit by bit as the partisan hacks they are.
During that time, they slowly started bleeding off right leaning customers. As time went on and they morphed from “left leaning” through “leftwing” all the way to “hard left, woke extremists”, the bleeding of rightwing and moderate readers accelerated to the point that the only readership they had left was hard left and pundits who maintained subscriptions just to stay up on the latest WP insanity.
I think Bezos has correctly assessed that this is not a sustainable model. He knows that he needs to get back to a more moderate tack. He further knows that he’s never going to do that with the hard left, wingbat staff working there now.
The loss of a good part of their leftist readership because he had the audacity to insist that the paper stay NEUTRAL in an election makes for a great excuse to start culling the herd.
If he has any chance of rebuilding that august institution (and I’d love to see him do it) he’s going to have to play the long game. He’s going to have to rid himself of the hard left staff and start bringing in moderates and maybe even a few (gasp!) right wing perspectives. He’s going to lose most of his current readership in so doing because the current readership is made up primarily of hard left, woke extremists who won’t tolerate anyone to the right of Mao Tse Tung.
After ridding the paper of some of the hard-left staff that has stymied any progress to date, as finances and opportunity permit, he can start bringing in some more moderate voices. Hopefully this will motivate even more of the hard-left radicals to quit in protest, giving him even more opportunity to replace them.
If he can pull it off and keep the paper afloat long enough to start convincing some moderates and right leaning people that the paper’s struck a new course, he might start winning back a depth of diverse readership that can sustain the business and return the paper to the stature and respect it should have tried to maintain all along.
Can he pull off this miracle? Time will tell.
Pingback: Now you know why I call it Journolism! – THE FIRST STREET JOURNAL.