Veteran Washington Post Columnist Eviscerates Trump ‘Supplicant’ Jeff Bezos In Scathing Resignation Post
(AP Photo/John Locher, File)
Joe Davidson, the veteran Washington Post news columnist, wrote a scathing goodbye to his employer of the last twenty years, revealing he quit the paper after his editors spiked a recent column for being too editorial.
Davidson’s “Federal Insider” column, which began in 2008, ended last month with him announcing he was leaving the Jeff Bezos-owned paper “because of a policy restricting the level of opinion and commentary in news section articles.” Davidson’s exit follows several high-profile writers, reporters, and editorial board members leaving the paper after Bezos brought in controversial new CEO Will Lewis to make the paper profitable again. Bezos sparked fury ahead of the 2024 presidential election by killing the paper’s endorsement of Kamala Harris, which he later defended in an op-ed.
“Quitting The Washington Post — or did it quit me?” began Davidson in a lengthy Facebook post this week. He added:
Washington Post Columnist.
What a great title in the world of journalism.
But it’s not worth keeping at any cost.
For me, the cost became too great when a Federal Insider column I wrote was killed because it was deemed too opinionated under an unwritten and inconsistently enforced policy, which I had not heard of previously. My resignation, after 20 years with The Post, took effect this month.
While the policy prohibiting opinion and commentary in News section articles can be justified journalistically, it is a departure from longstanding Post practice and mandated a change in my role that I chose not to accept. Some readers who commented on my final column skewered Post owner Jeff Bezos. I have no reason to believe he was directly involved in my situation, but it would be naïve to ignore the context.
In January, over 400 Washington Post journalists sent an urgent letter to Bezos urging him to come meet with the paper’s leadership and make a course correction as they fear readers now “question the integrity of this institution.”
“We are deeply alarmed by recent leadership decisions that have led readers to question the integrity of this institution, broken with a tradition of transparency, and prompted some of our most distinguished colleagues to leave, with more departures imminent. This goes far beyond the issue of the presidential endorsement, which we recognize as the owner’s prerogative. This is about retaining our competitive edge, restoring trust that has been lost, and reestablishing a relationship with leadership based on open communication,” read the letter at the time.
Davidson also noted the presidential endorsement in his post, adding, “Starting before the November presidential election, Bezos’s policies and activities have projected the image of a Donald Trump supplicant. The result – fleeing journalists, plummeting morale and disappearing subscriptions.”
Read the rest of Davidson’s post below:
Since October, when Bezos blocked publication of a planned Post endorsement of Kamala Harris for president, the departure of Post talent has been shocking and included five former editors directly above me in the newsroom’s hierarchy. Nonetheless, Post coverage of Trump remains strong. Yet the policy against opinion in News section columns means less critical scrutiny of Trump — a result coinciding with Bezos’s unseemly and well-document coziness with the president.
Blocking my column because it was too opinionated was a shock. I’ve authored many pieces over my 17 years writing the Federal Diary (renamed the Federal Insider in 2016), that were at least if not more opinionated as the now dead one. In that piece, I argued that “one hallmark of President Donald Trump’s first three, turbulent months in office is his widespread, ominous attack on thought, belief and speech.”
The piece contained specific examples, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s alarming memo supporting deportation of Columbia University pro-Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil. Rubio said Khalil could be expelled for “expected beliefs…that are otherwise lawful.” What immigrants might believe in the future now can make them federal law enforcement targets.
Another far-reaching example I cited is Trump’s aggressive attack on speech promoting diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI). His executive order commanded federal agencies to “excise references to DEI and DEIA [“A” for accessibility] principles, under whatever name they may appear.” Also, Tufts University student Rumeysa Ozturk, of Turkey, was abducted off the street by masked officers because she co-wrote an op-ed critical of Israel. It was a terrifying sight, caught on video, which previously would have seemed more applicable to George Orwell’s dystopian and cautionary tale against totalitarianism and thought police in is novel “1984.” This is America in 2025.
Killing that column was a death blow to my life as a Washington Post columnist. But I wrote two more articles to see if I could cope with the restrictions. That’s when I learned just how severe the policy is. In my next piece, I was not allowed to describe a potential pay raise for federal employees as “well-deserved” because of Post policy.
As a columnist, I can’t live with that level of constraint. A column without commentary made me a columnist without a column. I also was troubled by significant inconsistencies in the implementation of the policy. During this period, The Post allowed stronger, opinionated language by other staffers, including the words “viciousness,” “cruelty” and “meanness” to describe Trump’s actions.
I’m gone from The Post, but only as a journalist. Many people understandably have canceled subscriptions to protest Bezos’s actions that have damaged the news organization’s integrity. I still subscribe, and read and support the enduring fine work of Post journalists in the newspaper and digitally.
When Bezos bought The Post, he provided needed money, energy and direction. The Post continues to produce first rate journalism now, despite his morale-busting actions.
Read the full post here.
