×

Loading...
Ad by
  • 推荐 OXIO 加拿大高速网络,最低月费仅$40. 使用推荐码 RCR37MB 可获得一个月的免费服务
Ad by
  • 推荐 OXIO 加拿大高速网络,最低月费仅$40. 使用推荐码 RCR37MB 可获得一个月的免费服务

The hard truth: Americans don’t trust the news media! A note from our owner. 我看两遍,没有看明白。他的话我看不懂,惭愧,惭愧。英语好的帮助翻译全文吧。刚刚发表不到一个小时!

By Jeff Bezos

Jeff Bezos is the owner of The Washington Post.

In the annual public surveys about trust and reputation, journalists and the media have regularly fallen

near the very bottom, often just above Congress. But in this year’s Gallup poll, we have managed to fall

below Congress. Our profession is now the least trusted of all. Something we are doing is clearly not working.

Let me give an analogy. Voting machines must meet two requirements. They must count the vote

accurately, and people must believe they count the vote accurately. The second requirement is distinct from

and just as important as the first.

Likewise with newspapers. We must be accurate, and we must be believed to be accurate. It’s a bitter pill

to swallow, but we are failing on the second requirement. Most people believe the media is biased. Anyone

who doesn’t see this is paying scant attention to reality, and those who fight reality lose. Reality is an

undefeated champion. It would be easy to blame others for our long and continuing fall in credibility (and,

therefore, decline in impact), but a victim mentality will not help. Complaining is not a strategy. We must work

harder to control what we can control to increase our credibility.

Presidential endorsements do nothing to tip the scales of an election. No undecided voters in

Pennsylvania are going to say, “I’m going with Newspaper A’s endorsement.” None. What presidential

endorsements actually do is create a perception of bias. A perception of non-independence. Ending them is

a principled decision, and it’s the right one. Eugene Meyer, publisher of The Washington Post from 1933 to

1946, thought the same, and he was right. By itself, declining to endorse presidential candidates is not

enough to move us very far up the trust scale, but it’s a meaningful step in the right direction. I wish we had

made the change earlier than we did, in a moment further from the election and the emotions around it. That

was inadequate planning, and not some intentional strategy.

I would also like to be clear that no quid pro quo of any kind is at work here. Neither campaign nor

candidate was consulted or informed at any level or in any way about this decision. It was made entirely

internally. Dave Limp, the chief executive of one of my companies, Blue Origin, met with former president

Donald Trump on the day of our announcement. I sighed when I found out, because I knew it would provide

ammunition to those who would like to frame this as anything other than a principled decision. But the fact

is, I didn’t know about the meeting beforehand. Even Limp didn’t know about it in advance; the meeting was

scheduled quickly that morning. There is no connection between it and our decision on presidential

endorsements, and any suggestion otherwise is false.

When it comes to the appearance of conflict, I am not an ideal owner of The Post. Every day,

somewhere, some Amazon executive or Blue Origin executive or someone from the other philanthropies and companies I own or invest in is meeting with government officials. I once wrote that The Post is a

“complexifier” for me. It is, but it turns out I’m also a complexifier for The Post.

You can see my wealth and business interests as a bulwark against intimidation, or you can see them as a

web of conflicting interests. Only my own principles can tip the balance from one to the other. I assure you

that my views here are, in fact, principled, and I believe my track record as owner of The Post since 2013

backs this up. You are of course free to make your own determination, but I challenge you to find one

instance in those 11 years where I have prevailed upon anyone at The Post in favor of my own interests. It hasn’t happened.

Lack of credibility isn’t unique to The Post. Our brethren newspapers have the same issue. And it’s a

problem not only for media, but also for the nation. Many people are turning to off-the-cuff podcasts,

inaccurate social media posts and other unverified news sources, which can quickly spread misinformation

and deepen divisions. The Washington Post and the New York Times win prizes, but increasingly we talk only

to a certain elite. More and more, we talk to ourselves. (It wasn’t always this way — in the 1990s we achieved

80 percent household penetration in the D.C. metro area.)

While I do not and will not push my personal interest, I will also not allow this paper to stay on autopilot

and fade into irrelevance — overtaken by unresearched podcasts and social media barbs — not without a

fight. It’s too important. The stakes are too high. Now more than ever the world needs a credible, trusted,

independent voice, and where better for that voice to originate than the capital city of the most important

country in the world? To win this fight, we will have to exercise new muscles. Some changes will be a return

to the past, and some will be new inventions. Criticism will be part and parcel of anything new, of course.

This is the way of the world. None of this will be easy, but it will be worth it. I am so grateful to be part of

this endeavor. Many of the finest journalists you’ll find anywhere work at The Washington Post, and they

work painstakingly every day to get to the truth. They deserve to be believed.

Report

Replies, comments and Discussions:

  • 枫下茶话 / 社会政治 / The hard truth: Americans don’t trust the news media! A note from our owner. 我看两遍,没有看明白。他的话我看不懂,惭愧,惭愧。英语好的帮助翻译全文吧。刚刚发表不到一个小时!

    By Jeff Bezos

    Jeff Bezos is the owner of The Washington Post.

    In the annual public surveys about trust and reputation, journalists and the media have regularly fallen

    near the very bottom, often just above Congress. But in this year’s Gallup poll, we have managed to fall

    below Congress. Our profession is now the least trusted of all. Something we are doing is clearly not working.

    Let me give an analogy. Voting machines must meet two requirements. They must count the vote

    accurately, and people must believe they count the vote accurately. The second requirement is distinct from

    and just as important as the first.

    Likewise with newspapers. We must be accurate, and we must be believed to be accurate. It’s a bitter pill

    to swallow, but we are failing on the second requirement. Most people believe the media is biased. Anyone

    who doesn’t see this is paying scant attention to reality, and those who fight reality lose. Reality is an

    undefeated champion. It would be easy to blame others for our long and continuing fall in credibility (and,

    therefore, decline in impact), but a victim mentality will not help. Complaining is not a strategy. We must work

    harder to control what we can control to increase our credibility.

    Presidential endorsements do nothing to tip the scales of an election. No undecided voters in

    Pennsylvania are going to say, “I’m going with Newspaper A’s endorsement.” None. What presidential

    endorsements actually do is create a perception of bias. A perception of non-independence. Ending them is

    a principled decision, and it’s the right one. Eugene Meyer, publisher of The Washington Post from 1933 to

    1946, thought the same, and he was right. By itself, declining to endorse presidential candidates is not

    enough to move us very far up the trust scale, but it’s a meaningful step in the right direction. I wish we had

    made the change earlier than we did, in a moment further from the election and the emotions around it. That

    was inadequate planning, and not some intentional strategy.

    I would also like to be clear that no quid pro quo of any kind is at work here. Neither campaign nor

    candidate was consulted or informed at any level or in any way about this decision. It was made entirely

    internally. Dave Limp, the chief executive of one of my companies, Blue Origin, met with former president

    Donald Trump on the day of our announcement. I sighed when I found out, because I knew it would provide

    ammunition to those who would like to frame this as anything other than a principled decision. But the fact

    is, I didn’t know about the meeting beforehand. Even Limp didn’t know about it in advance; the meeting was

    scheduled quickly that morning. There is no connection between it and our decision on presidential

    endorsements, and any suggestion otherwise is false.

    When it comes to the appearance of conflict, I am not an ideal owner of The Post. Every day,

    somewhere, some Amazon executive or Blue Origin executive or someone from the other philanthropies and companies I own or invest in is meeting with government officials. I once wrote that The Post is a

    “complexifier” for me. It is, but it turns out I’m also a complexifier for The Post.

    You can see my wealth and business interests as a bulwark against intimidation, or you can see them as a

    web of conflicting interests. Only my own principles can tip the balance from one to the other. I assure you

    that my views here are, in fact, principled, and I believe my track record as owner of The Post since 2013

    backs this up. You are of course free to make your own determination, but I challenge you to find one

    instance in those 11 years where I have prevailed upon anyone at The Post in favor of my own interests. It hasn’t happened.

    Lack of credibility isn’t unique to The Post. Our brethren newspapers have the same issue. And it’s a

    problem not only for media, but also for the nation. Many people are turning to off-the-cuff podcasts,

    inaccurate social media posts and other unverified news sources, which can quickly spread misinformation

    and deepen divisions. The Washington Post and the New York Times win prizes, but increasingly we talk only

    to a certain elite. More and more, we talk to ourselves. (It wasn’t always this way — in the 1990s we achieved

    80 percent household penetration in the D.C. metro area.)

    While I do not and will not push my personal interest, I will also not allow this paper to stay on autopilot

    and fade into irrelevance — overtaken by unresearched podcasts and social media barbs — not without a

    fight. It’s too important. The stakes are too high. Now more than ever the world needs a credible, trusted,

    independent voice, and where better for that voice to originate than the capital city of the most important

    country in the world? To win this fight, we will have to exercise new muscles. Some changes will be a return

    to the past, and some will be new inventions. Criticism will be part and parcel of anything new, of course.

    This is the way of the world. None of this will be easy, but it will be worth it. I am so grateful to be part of

    this endeavor. Many of the finest journalists you’ll find anywhere work at The Washington Post, and they

    work painstakingly every day to get to the truth. They deserve to be believed.

    • He just got to know it? It's a bit too late.
    • 不难看懂吧
      • 似懂非懂。
        • Google translate 应该可以胜任
    • 中心思想:左右都不相信MSM了,被podcast超越了,赶紧掉头,才能生存。