Summary
Pulitzer-winning cartoonist Ann Telnaes resigned from The Washington Post after the paper refused to publish her cartoon depicting owner Jeff Bezos and other media leaders kneeling before Donald Trump.
Telnaes criticized the decision as censorship, calling it dangerous for press freedom.
The Post’s opinions editor, David Shipley, defended the move, citing redundancy with other content.
Telnaes’s resignation follows backlash over the Post’s recent editorial decisions, including avoiding endorsements for Kamala Harris, which led to mass subscription cancellations.
Telnaes has long been celebrated for her bold commentary and award-winning work.
Is this the original or did you create it?
It is from her post about it yeah.
https://anntelnaes.substack.com/p/why-im-quitting-the-washington-post
I think, from top down - Altman, besos, zuckerberg, ???, and mickey (did iger donate?).
Who is the bottom person though? Doesn’t look like him, but the Apple guy gave his protection money as well. And did Google bend the knee as well?
Okay, it was the LAtimes owner that also refused to endorse in editorial.
“The group in the cartoon included Mark Zuckerberg/Facebook & Meta founder and CEO, Sam Altman/AI CEO, Patrick Soon-Shiong/LA Times publisher, the Walt Disney Company/ABC News, and Jeff Bezos/Washington Post owner.”
Tim Cook just recently donated, so maybe him? Or even if not, worth the mention
Edit: oops it’s late and I missed “Apple guy” or “tim Apple” as trumps 5yo brain can remember
Jeff, Zuck, is that Spez? And I’m not sure who’s puckering up with the lipstick.
I think it’s the open AI guy
“My decision was guided by the fact that we had just published a column on the same topic as the cartoon and had already scheduled another column – this one a satire – for publication.”
It’s hard to make an argument that they are protecting Bezos if they already had 2 other articles criticizing him. But then why not just delay the cartoon?
Trump would never read the articles. But he would see the cartoon.
He’d have to have someone explain it to him though.
The comment was super weasely. “On the same topic” could mean anything. Based on what he says, the articles don’t need to mention Bezos at all.
Media being owned by a few rich people was and always has been dangerous for press freedom.
I can only really see workers co-ops striking the correct balance here. (Basically, editor makes decisions, when needed workers vote on whether to publish or not).
Capitalism is always the problem, and anti-democratic.
Editorial independence!
Not surprised they refused.
Well that just seems like she wanted to do it.
What?
