The contentious decision by the Los Angeles Times to withhold its endorsement of Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris has been thrust back into the spotlight, as an internal email from the paper’s billionaire owner Patrick Soon-Shiong reveals the war in Gaza to be a driving factor behind the controversial move.
The email, obtained by Drop Site News, directly contradicts Soon-Shiong’s previous public remarks downplaying the role of the Israel-Gaza conflict in shaping the paper’s stance on candidate endorsements. In the message, addressed to the Times’ top editor, president, and chief operating officer, Soon-Shiong characterizes Harris’s support for Israel’s year-long offensive in Gaza as tantamount to “genocide” and questions how the paper can ignore “the innocents being killed now.”
Soon-Shiong, a biotech entrepreneur who acquired the Los Angeles Times in 2018 with a pledge to combat fake news, writes:
Has there ever been a time in our history when our nation is knowingly providing arms to another nation using those weapons to kill children, women, innocent people and target the press, doctors and medical workers? And policies enabling this are supported it seems by both candidates?
We can and must acknowledge concerns for democracy and the Jan 6 episode and the horific [sic] [October 7] Hamas attacks. But how do we ignore the counter issues of the innocents being killed now? Do we accept that indeed genocide is happening and that we stand as a country of willing arms suppliers and yet remain silent?
Endorsement Veto Sparks Backlash
The revelation of Soon-Shiong’s Gaza-centric reasoning clashes with an interview he gave to the Times, in which he appeared to dismiss the conflict as a determining factor. His daughter, Nika Soon-Shiong, had previously hinted at the issue’s significance in a social media post, noting that it evoked memories of her father’s upbringing under South African apartheid.
The Times owner’s veto of the planned Harris endorsement ignited a firestorm within the paper, prompting the resignation of three editorial board members and a wave of subscription cancellations from outraged readers. Mariel Garza, one of the departing board members, told the Columbia Journalism Review, “In dangerous times, honest people need to stand up.”
Washington Post Follows Suit
The Los Angeles Times was not alone in its endorsement controversy. Days after Soon-Shiong’s bombshell decision, the Washington Post followed suit, with owner Jeff Bezos personally killing an article announcing the paper’s support for Harris. The move triggered a similar backlash of canceled subscriptions and editorial board resignations.
In a subsequent Washington Post article, Bezos attributed his veto to a widespread erosion of public trust in media, brushing aside accusations that he was motivated by a desire to appease President Donald Trump and shield his business interests from potential retaliation.
Nika Soon-Shiong: “Genocide Is a Line in the Sand”
As the furor over her father’s decision grew, Nika Soon-Shiong took to social media to offer insight into the rationale behind the Times’ stance. In a lengthy thread on X, she declared:
There is a lot of controversy and confusion over the LAT’s decision not to endorse a presidential candidate…..For me, genocide is a line in the sand.
The temptation is to speak in muffled tones about an issue the international courts have called a plausible genocide. But this moment requires opposition to crimes against humanity, ethnic cleansing, and Apartheid – as my parents did in South Africa.
This is not a vote for Donald Trump. This is a refusal to ENDORSE a candidate that is overseeing a war on children.
The leaked email from Patrick Soon-Shiong, coupled with his daughter’s impassioned defense, paints a complex picture of the ethical calculations and personal convictions that shaped one of the most consequential editorial decisions in recent memory. As the 2024 presidential race enters its final stretch, the controversy serves as a stark reminder of the outsized influence wielded by a select few media moguls in shaping public discourse and voter attitudes.
