Could media moguls bowing to Trump spell disaster for press freedom? The recent resignation of Pulitzer Prize-winning editorial cartoonist Ann Telnaes from The Washington Post is sparking alarm about the state of journalistic independence in an era of billionaire-owned news outlets.
Telnaes drew a satirical cartoon depicting Post owner Jeff Bezos and other media titans kneeling before then president-elect Donald Trump. But in an unprecedented move, the newspaper refused to publish it – prompting Telnaes to quit in protest over what she saw as censorship.
Her resignation comes on the heels of controversial decisions by Bezos and LA Times owner Patrick Soon-Shiong to prevent their papers’ editorial boards from endorsing Trump’s opponent Kamala Harris in the 2024 presidential race. This apparent self-censorship to avoid provoking Trump’s ire led to massive reader backlash and subscription cancellations.
Currying Favor with the Commander-in-Chief
Even more concerning are the actions of other media magnates seemingly trying to get in Trump’s good graces following his election victory:
- Mark Zuckerberg dined with Trump at Mar-a-Lago and had his company Meta donate $1 million to the presidential inauguration fund
- Disney’s ABC News paid Trump $15 million to settle a defamation lawsuit and expressed regret over claims the president had committed rape
With media owners taking such obsequious actions, how can the public trust that newsrooms will report honestly on those in power? As Telnaes wrote: “To be clear, there have been instances where sketches have been rejected or revisions requested, but never because of the point of view inherent in the cartoon’s commentary. That’s a gamechanger … and dangerous for a free press.”
Anticipatory Obedience and Sanitized Coverage
Critics argue the media’s “anticipatory obedience” to avoid Trump’s wrath will lead to toothless, sanitized coverage that fails to hold leaders accountable. The stakes are especially high given Trump’s history of calling the press the “enemy of the people” and seeking retribution against outlets he deems unfavorable.
A free, robust, and unencumbered press is critical to a functioning democracy. When media owners compromise their newsrooms’ editorial independence – whether explicitly or via “soft censorship” – public discourse and government oversight suffer immensely.
Geoffrey Stone, University of Chicago Law Professor
A Dangerous Precedent
The refusal to publish Telnaes’ cartoon sends a chilling message that certain topics are off-limits if they risk angering the powers that be. This self-imposed redline constrains journalists and emboldens would-be authoritarians. As Telnaes wrote, “That’s a gamechanger…and dangerous for a free press.”
Her principled resignation spotlights the perils of media properties being concentrated in the hands of a few billionaires whose other business interests may color newsroom decisions. Outlets buckling to political pressure, even in seemingly small ways, erodes public trust and weakens a key pillar of democracy.
The health of any democracy depends on a free and fearless Fourth Estate. When media moguls appear to prioritize currying favor with leaders over publishing hard-hitting journalism, it’s a disturbing sign of decay in the structures that hold the powerful to account. Telnaes’ departure is a canary in the coal mine.
