The endorsement (or not) of candidates

I had a similar reaction to many others about the Washington Post position of suddenly stating that they no longer endorse presidential candidates, rather late in the cycle, and atypical of their history. Most of the arguments made in the followup statement by the owner of the Post are of course rational and logical, but that does not make it right and I certainly share most of the concerns of others about the timing, motivations and drivers of this determination. I have always questioned why newspapers or other journals felt a need to formally “endorse” a specific candidate but given that OP-ED pages, editorials, and investigative reporting all end up leading a reader toward some inevitable logical conclusions, it seems odd to separate out a formal endorsement as the only point of bias or lack of neutrality. In many ways such an endorsement can help readers focus on synthesizing the various editorial opinions about a political race to assist in their own decisions, regardless of whether they agree or disagree with that endorsement. On the other hand, if we grant some of the legitimacy of this decision and announcement for the future, and even the present, then why couldn’t the statement have been much simpler…..HOW ABOUT THIS?===== “““““While we have always questioned the wisdom, the practice and even the impact/efficacy of official endorsements of candidates, we have and never will question the critical role we as independent journalists play in the elevation of issues to the broader public consciousness in such a way as to make the right conclusions obvious particularly when the issues relate to freedoms ,human rights and justice. With that in mind, we as a journal and organization will never endorse the actions, words or influence of public figures who wield their voice to spread lies, hatred, division and who threaten the freedom of the open press. We do NOT endorse endangering the lives and reputations of serious journalists either through direct statement, the incitement of others, or the indirect means of enabling surrogates. None of us should ever forget about 1930’s Germany, and the periods in American history where the vulnerability of the populus to widespread propaganda was so treacherous. If ever there was a modern political climate in which so many critical individual and cultural freedoms are at stake, magnified by those with the loudest voices and the capacity to abuse public forums for misinformation…this is that moment. We may not put our name on a specific candidate for any one office. But we do put our name on what is right, and if we have helped clarify further how wrong that candidate is with regard to these essential truths and issues….well, then you are free to draw your own conclusion as to who we might endorse if that were to be our role in the media culture”””””. How about a statement like that to really drive home what this should all be about?===