Jeff Bezos, the billionaire founder of Amazon and owner of The Washington Post, announced that he would be taking the storied newspaper in a new direction.
I hate that edgelord libertarians are trying to rebrand themselves as "anarcho-capatalist". Anarchy and capitalism are antithetical to one another. It doesn't have anything to do with anarchy if you aren't evaluating hierarchy, and capitalism is literally one of the most hierarchical organizational structures possible.
I offered David Shipley, whom I greatly admire, the opportunity to lead this new chapter. I suggested to him that if the answer wasn’t “hell yes,” then it had to be “no.” After careful consideration, David decided to step away.
Would love to see a really comprehensive list of sites that aren't garbage AI slop scam alleyways that would help cover the goods and services that Amazon acts as a one-stop convenience for. I don't want to support Amazon, but I also don't want to get scammed by handing out my credit card info to any old shopping site.
Feel free to add more suggestions in your own replies.
I'll start :
Electronics : B&H Photo - owned by religious folks so hours of operation are a little odd sometimes, but overall good customer service, fair prices, reliable shipping
Grocieries : Central Market - HEB's high-tier store chain for high-quality groceries, instead of Whole Foods
Kitchen supplies : Webstaurant - Wholesale store for things like home kitchen goods and supplies, as well as things like flatware and dishes
I want a non profit/open source store aggregator where we can search for what we want like Amazon but direct is to the site with the item we are looking for.
I agree, but also they don't make their money from sales. They make money from AWS servers/ services. I would bet that they lose money or maybe slightly break even on every sale of a physical item.
Hey, I like to think that sometimes I might feel the need to write remarkably similar sentences to the kinds that you, u/bearboiblake might have referenced in this particular editorial expression of human nature and sentiment in America, today.
There was a time when a newspaper, especially one that was a local monopoly, might have seen it as a service to bring to the reader’s doorstep every morning a broad-based opinion section that sought to cover all views.
That's exactly what a journalistic organisation is meant to do Jeff, especially now when the world is increasingly being filled with mouthpieces that regurgitate what their owners want them to.
An organisation that puts out only one opinion, or is only allowed to put out one opinion, is nothing more than a mouthpiece.
Its a shame to see the Post becoming just another mouthpiece.
On the other end, you've got billionaire Jeff Lawson rescuing The Onion from private equity hell. I count their revived print subscription as one of the best things I've spent money on recently, considering it used to be free.
Historically, journalism was about sifting through the different things that multiple people say are true, in order to figure out what actually is true.
But now it can just be about what one person says is true, and the internet can figure out what’s actually true!
We are going to be writing every day in support and defense of two pillars: personal liberties and free markets. We’ll cover other topics too of course, but viewpoints opposing those pillars will be left to be published by others.
Yeah, I am currently dealing with my last couple returns through them before I can properly cancel. I consider it punishment for not doing it earlier.
Ordered an ergo trackball, got sent the wrong model. Now since it's through a third party seller my return documentation says I need to call the seller, on the god damned telephone, for a free return label rather than paying for postage myself. I haven't even shipped the return yet and I have already been using one I bought direct from Logitech that was cheaper and arrived in 1-2 days with their free "4-7 day" shipping.
I am also awaiting my third copy of a monitor that comes with a no dead pixel guarantee. The number of dead pixels has been nonzero and increasing with each new monitor. This isn't necessarily Amazon's fault -- it took 3 tries to get my old 50" Panasonic plasma without a dead pixel -- but sending returns right back out the door is entirely likely too. I have bought and returned far more expensive things that absolutely looked like they were used (pro camera lenses for one).
For those on the fence on quitting Amazon: you can still use the website and shop, just search for the manufacturers website on stuff you want and purchase direct from them.
You know, like going to a book store and ordering the books you find there from Amazon.
Also even if something very specific that you want isn't available outside of Amazon, that's all the more reason to definitely not buy it and message the manufacturer/seller and let them know why you're not buying it. Boycotts will sometimes mean not buying something you really want to buy, that's working as designed.
Interestingly, the Post and the NYT both lean heavily on their Opinion sections to pretend they're not licking boots. Now the Post won't have that option.
I’m writing to let you know about a change coming to our opinion pages.
We are going to be writing every day in support and defense of two pillars: personal liberties and free markets. We’ll cover other topics too of course, but viewpoints opposing those pillars will be left to be published by others.
There was a time when a newspaper, especially one that was a local monopoly, might have seen it as a service to bring to the reader’s doorstep every morning a broad-based opinion section that sought to cover all views. Today, the internet does that job.
I am of America and for America, and proud to be so. Our country did not get here by being typical. And a big part of America’s success has been freedom in the economic realm and everywhere else. Freedom is ethical — it minimizes coercion — and practical — it drives creativity, invention, and prosperity.
I offered David Shipley, whom I greatly admire, the opportunity to lead this new chapter. I suggested to him that if the answer wasn’t “hell yes,” then it had to be “no.” After careful consideration, David decided to step away. This is a significant shift, it won’t be easy, and it will require 100% commitment — I respect his decision. We’ll be searching for a new Opinion Editor to own this new direction.
I’m confident that free markets and personal liberties are right for America. I also believe these viewpoints are underserved in the current market of ideas and news opinion. I’m excited for us together to fill that void.
No, no. Those workers are entering into a contract with just as much power as the asshole billionaire owner has. But demanding that asshole billionaire to pay a fair rate of tax-- that's coercion.
There, did I do the libertarian doublethink dance right?
I am really lost here. Is the idea to attract the exact same (super niche) readership as the wall street journal? We know from this election that there are very few voters in this domain, since this is exactly the type of voter Harris tried (and failed to) attract.
Somewhat ironically we have gone from the very bad outcome of for-profit media, to the even worse outcome of newspapers as personal vanity projects for out of touch billionaires.
Maybe it's time for people to start submitting Opinion pieces detailing how we can use the free market to make companies regret discontinuing their DEI programs or Pride merchandise, or telling how bodily autonomy and control over one's reproductive equipment is a central pillar of personal liberty.
Editing to add: in the event your submission is rejected, consider adding an opener such as: "This article was rejected by The Washington Post despite meeting their criteria of focus on the free market (or personal liberty)." And then submitting it to one or several of their competitors. Even the ones that aren't any better, pitting their competitive instincts against their conservativism.
Oh I still think it would be interesting to try, and once rejected send the items to their competitors with the prompt "rejected by WaPo despite being about the topics they claim to support." After all, I can only cancel my subscription once, but making sure others are aware of this enshittification might lead them to cancel theirs as well. Whether it's by my item being published or by sparking a followup story by a competitor doesn't matter to me.
Freedom is ethical — it minimizes coercion — and practical — it drives creativity, invention, and prosperity.
So buying a major newspaper and firing (or putting pressure on) anybody who doesn't agree with the new owner's "pillars" is not coercion? Did Bezos get this buff from the mental gymnastics?
PS: surprised nobody mentioned Manufacturing Consent yet, which describes exactly what is happening here, and remains valid in the age of Internet
Ah yes, the "personal liberty" to just accumulate wealth without limits or taxation because that is a "free market". Never mind Amazon drives on roads built with federal dollars—they are a job creator and everyone should lick their boots for that.
We are going to be writing every day in support and defense of two pillars: personal liberties and free markets. We’ll cover other topics too of course, but viewpoints opposing those pillars will be left to be published by others.
Just dragging this newspaper into the right wing muck at full speed now
I’m confident that free markets and personal liberties are right for America. I also believe these viewpoints are underserved in the current market of ideas and news opinion. I’m excited for us together to fill that void.
"Market of ideas" but you're only allowed to say what I like
It's a good thing I stopped bothering with the Washington Post even before Bezos bought it. In fact pretty much every news organization that is owned by a singular entity is completely worthless nowadays.
Is he trying to "get out in front of this story" like he did with the photos of him having an affair? Has anyone heard from David Shipley what happened?
I find it important that he writes, that freedom of individuals and markets is important because it is without coercion.
To then go on and write that he tried to coerce his editor to accept the change with a "hell yes" or basically resign. This is coercion. Doesn't he see this? Is the irony lost on him?
I’m confident that free markets and personal liberties are right for America. I also believe these viewpoints are underserved in the current market of ideas and news opinion.
He doesn't give a fuck about whether his statements reflect reality at all, he only cares that his statements push reality towards being like how he thinks it ought to be, with him in charge and us under his thumb
I’m writing to let you know about a change coming to our opinion pages.
We are going to be writing every day in support and defense of two pillars: personal liberties and free markets. We’ll cover other topics too of course, but viewpoints opposing those pillars will be left to be published by others.
Mmm. Well, I'll take a look at their editorials, see where this is going. I don't have a problem with personal liberties and free markets, but there can be baggage that comes with that.