Opinion: Why Jeff Bezos needs to walk the talk about the new Washington Post Opinions section

…potential Opinions contributors under the new guidelines will have abundant opportunities to hold Bezos to his own words. That’s because ‘personal liberties’ are as expansive as the Constitution itself.”

Stuart N. Brotman

There is much chatter, and perhaps even more consternation, about this week’s decision of Jeff Bezos, the billionaire owner of The Washington Post, to limit the coverage of its widely read and highly influential Opinions section. In a post on X, he wrote: “We are going to be writing every day in support and defense of two pillars: personal liberties and free markets.” Bezos added that the new topics “are right for America. I also believe that these viewpoints are underserved in the current market of ideas and news opinion.”  Further, “viewpoints opposing those pillars will be left to be published by others.” Opinions editor David Shipley resigned rather than lead the shift, Bezos said.

The internal blowback to this announcement has been both understandable and intense. The reaction to this move by the paper’s well-respected former executive editor, Marty Baron, is especially searing. “What Bezos is doing... runs counter to what he said, and actually practiced, during my tenure at The Post,” Baron remarked. “I have always been grateful for how he stood up for The Post and an independent press against Trump’s constant threats to his business interests. Now I couldn’t be more sad and disgusted.” 

The negative comments also are reverberating throughout the journalism community nationwide and may well prompt a new round of massive defections among digital subscribers who are essential to maintain any semblance of financial health beyond the ability of Bezos to write checks to cover mounting losses.

Once the shock and protests subside, however, it seems like the focus should be on how to ensure that Bezos should be held to his word. Here, the notion of personal liberties that he indicates will be championed in an unprecedented way should reflect the expansive meaning that this concept embodies in our cherished Bill of Rights. So, let’s see if Bezos opens the re-designed Opinions section to contributors who address an expansive range of topics covered by the first ten amendments of the U.S. Constitution. The First Amendment itself covers five areas of personal liberties: religion, speech, press, assembly and petitioning the government. Virtually any topic that makes headlines these days seems to address one of them, so it seems to fit squarely within the new Bezos formulation that emphasizes the importance of personal liberties.

Issues related to gun ownership, including gun violence, school shootings and gun suicides? Take a look at the Second Amendment. The criminal justice system, including possible reforms based on current inequities? Look no further than the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Amendments.  The Ninth Amendment has encompassed areas such as privacy and bodily autonomy, meaning that just about any topic related to healthcare should fit into this purported big tent. The Tenth Amendment addresses the role of states in relation to the federal government, which covers just about anything dealing with political power. In short, the list of issue possibilities can be virtually endless.

What I am suggesting here is that potential Opinions contributors under the new guidelines will have abundant opportunities to hold Bezos to his own words. That’s because “personal liberties” are as expansive as the Constitution itself. “I am of America and for America, and proud to be so,” he proclaimed in his X post. “Our country did not get here by being typical.”

This sentiment seems wonderful, but whether it is sincere and put into practice through publication of diverse viewpoints that favor expanding our nation’s civil liberties even further will be the acid test whether principles can prevail over the personal profit of its owner. The proof will be in the pudding, for sure. 

Stuart N. Brotman is Digital Media Laureate and Distinguished Senior Fellow at The Media Institute. He is the author of The First Amendment Lives On.