Illustration: Odisha+
Oct. 29, 2024 by David Silverberg
When The Paradise Progressive launched in December 2018 it was inspired by The Washington Post and its then-newly minted motto, “Democracy dies in darkness.”
The motto had the benefit of being absolutely true: democracy does die in darkness. But to this author it seemed incomplete. While it accurately described what happens when darkness descends, there was a more positive aspect that needed to be expressed.
And so, The Paradise Progressive chose to complete the thought: “but liberty lives in light.”
“Democracy dies in darkness but liberty lives in light”—in the years since, this has been reality that has guided this platform and its coverage. The last part of that sentence marks the close of every article.
On Friday, Oct. 25, The Washington Post announced that it was declining to make an endorsement in the presidential race between Vice President Kamala Harris and former president Donald Trump.
In the most consequential contest between democracy and dictatorship in American history, The Washington Post as an institution chose to sit on the sidelines.
There is no middle ground here. On one side is a strong, caring committed candidate who will uphold democracy, America and the Constitution. On the other is a vengeful, selfish, delusional would-be dictator who vows to snuff out freedom, terminate the Constitution and kneel to Russia and a constellation of dictators.
Endorsements and penalties
As reprehensible as it was, Washington Post owner Jeff Bezos’ reluctance to endorse was certainly understandable. After all, political endorsements come with consequences.
There is retaliation, both great and small, for making an endorsement that a candidate and his followers may not like. (For example, when The Paradise Progressive endorsed Cindy Banyai in the Democratic congressional primary election in 2020, it was prohibited from ever posting again on the largest Democratic chat room in Southwest Florida.)
As The Paradise Progressive has stated many times—indeed, every time it has made endorsements during its existence—it is the duty of a media outlet covering politics to endorse a candidate when choices are difficult. Following candidates and political developments on a regular basis gives journalists insights and knowledge that need to be shared with voters. Whether the outlet is national or local television, print newspapers or even a simple blog, it is the obligation of independent media in a free society to help voters make an informed choice.
It is the failure of The Washington Post to fulfill this duty, which it has otherwise done since 1976, that is so painful and hurtful to democracy and betrays its own motto.
Since threats and intimidation are part of Donald Trump’s standard modus operandi, no doubt the threats to Bezos and his business empire were explicit, far-reaching and, under a Trump dictatorship should it come to that, devastating.
For millions of people who have looked to The Washington Post as a pillar of democracy, fearless journalism and a source of enlightenment, the non-endorsement was a stunning blow. Expressions of outrage and disappointment have been broad, loud and intense. They range from Washington Post staffers and columnists, to readers and subscribers who are vowing to cancel their subscriptions in droves.
Bezos lacked the courage and commitment of the newspaper’s previous owner, Katherine Graham. He didn’t even have the guts of Taylor Swift, who endorsed Harris after her debate with Trump.
The Washington Post now joins Los Angeles Times and its owner Patrick Soon-Shiong, in choosing not to take sides in this epochal contest.
One of the pitiable aspects of this affair is that both The Washington Post and Los Angeles Times were much improved by their respective owners. The Los Angeles Times was ailing financially before Soon-Shiong’s firm, NantCapital, bought it in 2018 and made a major investment in it.
Bezos’ ownership of The Washington Post, which he bought in 2013, also provided new investment. It allowed the hiring of top-notch new staffers. Coverage became more extensive and deeper. It modernized digitally across all platforms and its presentation of content became more sophisticated and creative. To the best of this author’s ability to determine, Bezos did not intervene editorially and left decisionmaking to well-regarded professionals—until now.
Darkness in Southwest Florida
The Washington Post has virtually no impact in Southwest Florida and so very few people (this author among them) are affected by its endorsement failure. Had it endorsed Kamala Harris, as it was about to do, it was unlikely to sway any local votes at all.
But Southwest Florida has long been living in a media darkness of its own that proves the truth of The Washington Post motto.
On June 1, 2022, the Naples Daily News eliminated its daily editorial and op-ed pages. It has not published an original editorial or endorsed a candidate since then.
Local broadcaster WINK TV has been browbeaten and intimidated by Lee County Sheriff Carmine Marceno, choosing not to investigate what appeared to be a culture of violence in his department and failing to report serious allegations of a money laundering and a kickback scheme using a “ghost” employee. It was the only station in Florida that pulled a pro-Amendment 4 advertisement when it received a cease-and-desist letter on Oct. 3 from state Attorney General Ashley Moody in an anti-choice effort.
A judge subsequently ruled the state’s actions to be unconstitutional.
“To keep it simple for the State of Florida: it’s the First Amendment, stupid,” wrote Chief US District Judge Mark Walker of the Northern District of Florida in issuing a restraining order against the state on Oct. 18. (WINK resumed running the ad five days after suspending it.)
Sadly, the local media weakness in upholding the media’s constitutional role of scrutinizing government, highlighting wrongdoing and informing the public goes beyond just a lack of political reporting and endorsements.
Most notably, there has not been a single debate between local candidates sponsored by any local media organization during this year’s campaign season. There were a few “forums” but these are not debates, nor were they covered or broadcast.
Moreover, this comes in a year when Americans witnessed two of the most consequential political debates in American history. The first was on June 27 of this year when President Joe Biden proved incapable of holding his own against Donald Trump and was moved to drop out of the race. The other was on Sept. 10 when Vice President Kamala Harris crushed the former president, who was reduced to babbling about a “concept of a plan” and accusing Haitian immigrants of eating cats and dogs.
In a year when debates were front and center on the national stage, Southwest Florida, its media and its civic institutions could not find the will, time or resources to hold debates for any local office up for election.
In the past, local debates were a traditional rite of democracy for offices high and low, so common they were mocked as boringly mundane in the song “Mrs. Robinson” (“…going to the candidates debate…”).
However, avoiding debate is now a standard Republican tactic. A vigorous, principled media that takes its responsibilities seriously would force a debate but that is certainly not the case in Southwest Florida.
In this year’s congressional contest for the 19th Congressional District, the coastal area from Cape Coral to Marco Island, Democrat Kari Lerner challenged incumbent Republican Rep. Byron Donalds to a debate. He ignored the challenge and not a whimper of protest was heard from the local media in either condemning this failure or offering to conduct a debate. He suffered no penalty and did not have to defend his record or argue the issues.
In this he joins his Republican predecessor, former congressman Francis Rooney, who similarly refused debate during his re-election campaign in 2018 and suffered no penalty for it.
If democracy is not entirely dead in all of Southwest Florida then the media piece of it has certainly wilted like a patch of grass in dry season.
Commentary: Liberty and safety
All these failures to stand on the side of the Constitution, press freedom and democracy directly threaten the media platforms that abstain from their paramount duty to uphold American democracy.
In particular the Post’s non-endorsement is an act of monumental cowardice and a dark stain on the history of the institution, particularly because it’s located in the nation’s capital and political coverage is its strong point. But more importantly, the non-endorsement will not protect Bezos and the Post, for if Trump comes to power, the Post is likely to be the first newspaper that he closes.
Indeed, whether in Washington, Los Angeles, Southwest Florida or anywhere else, the free and independent media as a whole will likely cease to exist in a Trump regime as he and his army of sycophants and enablers shut down newspapers, cancel broadcasting licenses and censor online platforms.
Even now, American media outlets don’t seem to have grasped their stake in this contest. A Donald Trump dictatorship is an existential threat—and existential means they will cease to exist. There will no longer be a free press. They will be eliminated. No amount of neutrality or objectivity on their part will change this—and even Fox News won’t be immune as his rants against that conservative network have proven.
Bezos, Soon-Shiong, Gannett, Hearst, Murdoch, the McBride family that owns WINK TV, and all other media owners may think they can stand aside and find some safe, non-controversial ground that protects their investments and interests and doesn’t offend readers and viewers but there is no such place in this contest.
What is more, none of their business empires will be safe either, as has been demonstrated by President Vladimir Putin of Russia. He warred on that country’s billionaires until he brought them to heel. Those who didn’t comply went to prison or “fell” out of windows. Do American owners really think that Trump, a slavish admirer of Putin, will do any less?
Benjamin Franklin famously said: “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
If he were alive today, Franklin would say exactly this about these non-endorsements and the cowardice of media in the face of a clear and present danger. If Trump comes to power their cowardice will not protect them. He will swallow them whole. Whatever “little temporary safety” these owners and managers hope to cling to, they will lose the “essential liberty” that makes their existence possible. Not only will they not deserve liberty or safety, they simply won’t have it.
However, their cowardice does not have to extend to everyone else. Every patriotic, thinking, freedom-loving American can make up in commitment and with his or her vote what these moguls lack in courage.
On Tuesday, Nov. 5, democracy does not have to die in darkness.
Liberty lives in light
© 2024 by David Silverberg