Jeff Bezos Used To Be In Love with The Washington Post. What Happened?

Summary

Podcast Summary: Channels with Peter Kafka Episode: "Jeff Bezos Used To Be In Love with The Washington Post. What Happened?" Date: February 5, 2026 Host: Peter Kafka | Guest: Eric Wemple (NYT, formerly The Washington Post)

---

Overview

This episode dives into the dramatic transformation of The Washington Post under Jeff Bezos’s ownership, focusing on recent massive layoffs, the shifts in newsroom strategy, and Bezos's waning passion for the paper. Peter Kafka and media critic Eric Wemple analyze the institution’s rise and challenges since 2013, the implications of Bezos’s leadership, and what the future might hold for one of America’s iconic newsrooms.

---

Major Discussion Points & Key Insights

1. The Mass Layoffs at The Washington Post

• Scope of Cuts: Roughly 300 people let go from the newsroom—over a third of staff—bringing headcount down to levels last seen when Bezos bought the paper in 2013 ([03:03]).
  • "It's kind of a cataclysm... essentially brings the newsroom down to around 500." – Eric Wemple ([03:09])
• Rationales Given: Management says cuts are to “save the institution”—a common refrain in struggling print media ([04:25]).
  • Entire sports section and large portions of international and metro coverage are gutted.

2. Bezos’s Purchase and Early Years

• Context of the Buy: The Post was “faded,” but not dysfunctional, when Bezos swooped in for $250 million in 2013, following years of revenue decline from lost classifieds ([06:33]).
  • "The Graham family... was an amazing steward for the Post. When business got rough... they gave [staff] wheelbarrows full of money to leave..." – Eric Wemple ([06:33])
• Initial Optimism: Bezos wowed staff, invested heavily, beefed up political, investigative, international, tech and audience teams.
  • "He basically took a creaky old website and made it... a Formula One machine." – Eric Wemple ([08:20])
• Deferential Ownership: Bezos avoided editorial meddling, letting legendary editor Marty Baron lead.
  • "He was a mezzanine owner... just sort of looked on, and it was remarkable because the newsroom really, really, really roared..." – Eric Wemple ([10:46])

3. The “Trump Bump” and Business Success

• Profitability: Under Baron, the Post enjoyed “six straight years of profitability,” leveraging national news moments and Trump's presidency ([11:41]).
• Experimentation & Overreach: Rapid staff expansion post-Trump led to over-indexing; numbers ballooned to 1,100+ employees, setting stage for eventual contraction ([13:13]).

4. Post-Trump Decline & Strategic Blunders

• Audience Shrinkage: Web traffic and digital ad revenue fell industry wide ([14:29]).
• Editorial Turbulence: Bezos-installed managers cut staff, changed direction, and—most controversial—ordered the editorial board NOT to endorse a candidate in 2024.
  • "Starting in October 2024... the Post would not be endorsing a candidate... after [editorial board] had drafted an editorial in favor of Kamala Harris, and hell broke loose. A subscription desertion of hundreds of thousands..." – Eric Wemple ([18:07])
  • NPR’s David Folkenflik reported 250,000 subscription cancelations; Post never denied it ([19:03]).

5. Questions Around Editorial Independence

• News Side Remains Unbowed: Despite Bezos’s cozying up to Trump 2.0, reporters remain independent.
  • "On the news side, I still don't see [interference]. And the coverage, I think, speaks to their independence." – Eric Wemple ([16:16])
  • Kafka highlights the Post’s scoop on U.S. action in Venezuela as proof ([17:05]).
• Opinion Side Changed: Bezos exercised traditional owner rights; his influence clear in major editorial decisions.

6. Future Viability, Direction, and Uncertainty

• Mysterious Ownership Motives: Unclear why Bezos still owns the Post, given reduced satisfaction and mounting headaches.

  • "It is entirely a black box... he seemed to be deriving a great deal of satisfaction from this. ...I'm not so sure that that is as strong as it once was. In fact, I'm pretty sure it isn't." – Eric Wemple ([26:44])
  • “We saved the Washington Post once, we're going to save it again.” – Jeff Bezos ([28:05])

• Missed Digital Opportunities: The Post failed to invent services like Politico Pro despite its location and legacy ([29:32]).

  • "I asked the Post, why aren't you doing this? And the answer I got back then was that's not what we do." – Eric Wemple ([30:56])

• Staff Demoralization: Cuts and managerial silence sap morale; little optimism among those who remain ([32:41]).

  • "They don't see a lot of creativity... that's an enormous problem." – Eric Wemple ([34:49])

• Cautious Outlook: At best, “flat is the new up.” Wemple predicts the Post might just hold the line at current levels ([35:05]).

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the rationale for the layoffs:
  • "We need to cut it to save it." – Peter Kafka ([04:32])
• On Bezos’s early enthusiasm:
  • "He answered those questions with tremendous enthusiasm and competence. He seemed really energized... backed it up with money..." – Eric Wemple ([08:20])
• On the sudden subscription collapse:
  • "A subscription desertion of hundreds of thousands, hundreds of thousands is an astonishing number." – Peter Kafka ([18:44])
• On coded language in management memos:
  • "Why are you, like, trying to, like, whisper to the newsroom some message that you're not willing to articulate?" – Eric Wemple ([24:54])

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

• [03:03] — Scale and effects of layoffs
• [06:33] — State of the Post when Bezos bought it
• [09:38] — Bezos’s initial vision and investments
• [11:41] — “Trump bump,” years of profitability
• [13:13] — Over-staffing and financial reversal
• [18:07] — 2024 non-endorsement and lost subscribers
• [16:16]/[17:05] — Editorial independence on news coverage
• [29:32] — Missed digital policy/insider product opportunities
• [32:41] — Morale and lack of strategy among staff
• [35:05] — Prognosis for the next year: “flat is the new up”

---

Tone and Takeaways

Peter Kafka and Eric Wemple maintain a candid, unsparing tone, balancing nostalgia for the paper’s Bezos-fueled renaissance with clear-eyed assessments of recent failures and uncertainty. Wemple’s position, as both an insider and an observer, gives authority to his skepticism and concern for the Post’s future.

For those who haven’t listened:
This episode is an unvarnished look at the rapidly changing fortunes of a flagship U.S. newspaper, shot through with insights on media business realities, billionaire ownership, and the delicate lines between stewardship, interference, and abdication.

---

End of summary.

Transcript

[Henry Blodgett]

AI can Fix Healthcare. I'm Henry Blodgett and this week on my show Solutions, I had a fascinating conversation with Dr. Bob Wachter, author of A Giant How AI is Transforming Healthcare and what It Means for our future. Dr. Wachter was not expecting to be an AI optimist. What convinced him? Follow Solutions with Henry Blodgett wherever you get your podcasts to hear more.

[Podcast Host (Explain It To Me)]

When you think of someone with adhd, who comes to mind? Is it a woman in her 30s?

[Eric Wemple]

Just this constant feeling of being too

[Podcast Host (Net Worth and Chill)]

much, you know, too kinetic, too loud,

[Eric Wemple]

all of the too anything and just

[Podcast Host (Net Worth and Chill)]

really feeling like people got some kind

[Eric Wemple]

of social rulebook that I never got.

[Podcast Host (Explain It To Me)]

The changing face of adhd. That's this week on Explain It To Me New episodes Sundays. Wherever you get your podcasts.

[Podcast Host (Net Worth and Chill)]

This week on Net Worth and Chill. I'm taking you inside my sold out New York City book tour stop for my brand new book well Endowed. I sat down with the hilarious Heather McMahon for a night of laughs, real money talk and honest financial truths. We're getting into everything the book covers from how to actually build wealth, how to protect it, and how to stop leaving money on the table. Whether you've already grabbed your copy of well Endowed or you're still on the fence, this episode will show you exactly why everyone's talking about it. Listen wherever you get your podcasts or watch on YouTube.com YourRichBFF.

[Peter Kafka]

From the Vox Media Podcast Network. This is Channels with Peter Kafka. That is me. I'm also chief correspondent at Business Insider. We are back for a second time this week, this time to talk about the massive cuts at the Washington Post, which is owned by Jeff Bezos, who of course is one of the richest men in the world. I also wanted to talk about the history of Bezos and the Post, which is more complicated than I think a lot of people realize, because for many years Jeff Bezos and the Washington Post were a success story, maybe the best possible outcome for a billionaire buying a media company. Now things are very different. We have the best possible guest on for this. That is Eric Wemple, who joined the New York Times last year to cover media and for many years before that cover media at the water Washington Post. So he's been able to see the effects of Bezos on that paper firsthand. Let's hear from him now. Here's me talking to Eric Wemple. I'm here with Eric Wemple from the New York Times. He's been there less than a year and forever. Preceding that, he was at the Washington Post. So he is the perfect person to talk about what is happening at the Post. Thanks for joining, Eric.

[Eric Wemple]

Oh, thanks for having me. I really appreciate it.

[Peter Kafka]

Anyone who listens to this podcast knows there were massive layoffs at the Washington Post on Wednesday. We're recording Thursday. But let's just set. Let's set the level here. What did the Post do yesterday? How many folks were let go? And why did the Post say they were doing that?

[Eric Wemple]

So, as best we can tell, there are about 300 people let go from the newsroom of the Post, although the cuts went across the country at a 30% clip. So it's 300% in the newsroom. As far as I can tell, there are somewhere between 770, 830, about 800 people in the newsroom. So that's a cut of more than a third in the newsroom staff. It's kind of a cataclysm in that respect because it essentially brings the newsroom down to around 500. And when Jeff Bezos bought the Washington Post in 2013 for $250 million, the staff was around 570 and 570, 550, somewhere in the mid-500. And that is that was down in turn from the peak during the early aughts under executive editor Len Downie. So it had already beenit had already been on the downswing then, and now we're back down at that point.

[Peter Kafka]

So they're wiping out whole sections like sports, gutting most of their international reporting. What is the rationale the Post has said for the cuts? They're cutting stuff across the paper, like you said, but they're also hammering specific sections are just going away. What is the rationale for what they're doing?

[Eric Wemple]

Well, the short version is to save the institution. That's the short version. We're going to save the Washington Post.

[Peter Kafka]

We need to cut it to save it.

[Eric Wemple]

Yep. And you know, that's not new in the newspaper business. That's not a new thought. And, you know, maybe it works sometimes, but it's problematic. Obviously. The longer version of the answer is, well, we look carefully at what people want. We look carefully at what people are clicking on, carefully at what they're reading. And this we are aligning the newsroom with what people really want. And so they got rid of essentially either got rid of or really reduced, scaled back the international coverage, the sports coverage, and the metro coverage. The sports department is pretty much folded up. They have a few reporters that they've essentially migrated over to the features section. To write on the cultural aspect aspects of sports Metro section. Best I can tell was in maybe the 40 range, which again is way down from its peak a couple decades ago of around 200. So it's now going to be down into the teens, maybe a dozen somewhere in there. That's my best reporting and my colleagues too. Ben Mullen, Katie Robertson, done amazing work on this. International drastically reduced as well, although the international coverage is not going away completely the way the sports section essentially is. Go ahead.

[Peter Kafka]

We could talk more about the strategy later. In the memo that Matt Murray, the paper's top editor, put out, he explained the rationale, went through what you're talking about. There's no mention of Jeff Bezos in his memo, the owner of the paper, as you mentioned, he bought, he bought the post for $250 million in 2013. He is the central figure in this story right now, but it's also a confusing story. So maybe you can walk us through the history of Bezos in the paper and where the Post was at in 2013 when he bought it and what he did since then.

[Eric Wemple]

Yeah, I'd be happy to. So Bezos came in. The Graham family, which had owned the Post forever, right, was an amazing steward for the Post. When business got rough in the early aughts, they did a series of buyouts. They didn't lay people off. They gave them wheelbarrows full of money to leave the Post because they had a really well funded pension plan, sort of a legacy of Berkshire Hathaway, Warren Buffett. Their connection with them, overfunded pension plans. So they did all these buyouts. They had to scale back their newsroom because the Internet had blown holes in classifieds. Classifieds would just be huge at the Washington Post if I wanted to sell my bicycle back in the late 80s or the early.

[Peter Kafka]

And every local paper, right, that was classifieds was what kept every local newspaper not just alive but like fat with cash. And that business all went away.

[Eric Wemple]

It was amazing. It was the place you went. And so that blow a hole in that blew a hole in the advertising revenue, so on and so forth. That's a familiar story. So they scaled back the newsroom. And the newsroom at the time Bezos bought it in 2013 was not dysfunctional. It wasn't like a bunch of laggards. These were really good journalists. But still the paper was in a bit of a fun. Sarah Ellison wrote about it in 2012 saying, what's up with the Washington Post? Missed some opportunities. Jim Vande Hei and John Harris had launched Politico several years before. The Washington Post missed that opportunity to do a high octane, really quick twitch political site. The rap on the Post was that it had seen better days. It wasn't a reclamation project, but it had seen better days.

[Peter Kafka]

It was faded when he bought it. And that's one of the reasons he was able to buy it for $250 million.

[Eric Wemple]

Correct. And Don Graham being, I think, one of the greatest newspaper, one of the greatest newspaper families ever understood this. And he's like, I need to find someone who I think will carry forward the tradition of the Washington Post. And when Bezos came in early in his tenure, like around August, September 2013, he came in and really wowed the staff. He did a plenary session. All the dignitaries from the Washington Post history were there. We all asked him questions. He answered those questions with tremendous enthusiasm and competence. He seemed really energized by this and that bore out because he invested in the Post. He basically took a creaky old website and made it kind of like a. Kind of a formula one machine. You know what I mean?

[Peter Kafka]

Talk about the investment he put in. Because you're saying, you know, at the beginning of this interview, you're saying, you know, we're down to basically the staff he was had when he bought it, which meant that he then had staffed up with hundreds of people. What was the plan when he came in? Was it. Was it. What did he think he was going to do when he bought it?

[Eric Wemple]

Well, when he came in, he was energetic, but deferential on the, you know, on the particulars of running the newspaper. He's like, you know what? I'm not in this business, but I do know how to organize discussions about the future of a business. And that's what he did. I was in one of them. It was really remarkable. You know, he had these things that he believed in and he was important in guiding conversations. And Marty Barron writes about a lot of this in Collision of Power, which is his memoir of this time. And it was really remarkable because he backed it up with money. I mean, he invested in the newspaper, he invested in the political coverage big time. Investigative, I think, went up international got a huge, huge boost, and the technology did, too. Audience, staff understanding our audience was, you know, that went through the roof as well. People all of a sudden, we all of a sudden had all these metrics

[Peter Kafka]

about, this is exactly what you want from your billionaire tech owner. Give us a bunch of money, give us more, improve our tech. Also stay away. Don't tell us what to do. This is the perfect scenario, right? This is why you want a tech billionaire to come save your local paper.

[Eric Wemple]

Yeah, I mean, I think you can take over at this point, Peter. But yes, that's the point. That is exactly the sentiment. And I think that one of the things that you mentioned in there is really worth pausing on for a second, which is the lack of intervention, the lack of meddling. Bezos was a mezzanine owner. He just sort of looked on and it was remarkable because the newsroom really, really, really roared, especially in the first Trump period. Marty was there. Marty, legendary editor. The guy's a machine. He's like this news robot. He understands more about news and what everybody's published. He reads, reads and reads and reads. And you saw how he writes too, just yesterday with the statement he made on the cutbacks. But he really harnessed Bezos investment in a way that was really kind of historic.

[Peter Kafka]

So not only does this produce great journalism, it seems like it becomes a business success story. Right. At some point the Post is profitable. And we hear that's a true attributed to the Trump bump. But just because Donald Trump's in office doesn't mean you turn a profit, right? Someone had to be doing something correct at the Post.

[Eric Wemple]

That's right. That's right. That's a very good distinction. And that's also something Marty talks about. He says six straight years of profitability in his book. I know that you've heard those claims about a lot of businesses over the years, and in this case, we don't have paperwork to substantiate that. And there still was a substantial investment on the front end from Bezos. But I take Marty his word. If those years are profitable, they're profitable. He put it in black and white. And they were really good years. And the Post did invest with that money and it was great.

[Peter Kafka]

So then we cut To Post Trump 1.0. There's a lot of hand wringing about what happens after the Trump bump. People expect an audience to decline across lots of different publications and news outlets. That happens. And so it makes sense that the Post would struggle a bit. But the numbers you hear about the reported losses, $77 million of losses, one year, $100 million of losses, supposedly 2024. I've read a ton of stuff about what's happened in the Post. I still don't understand how you can swing to that high of a loss that quickly just because your web traffic goes down. What am I missing?

[Eric Wemple]

I share your. I share your sort of knowledge hole here. I Share your knowledge gap. I think one of the things that was said or has been reported and pretty well substantiated is they may have overindexed on the staff growth. They vaulted up over 1,000, I think, towards the end of Marty's tenure. He left in early 2021 or maybe just after he left, but they kept going. And under Sally Busby, I believe they vaulted over over 1100. So I think that they got ahead of themselves on that and they had to pare that back. And that was one of the things that Fred Ryan had trouble sort of responding to, like, oh, well, we have to cut. Because I think we, you know, it was apparent that they went too far. I think that's one of the things. Another consideration is that the digital advertising market sort of dried up alongside. Right. And so. So that was a big deal. But again, we don't get SEC filings from the Washington Post. So it's all some. It's all somewhat a mystery. And. But I don't doubt it. I don't doubt it.

[Peter Kafka]

You don't doubt that there's meaningful losses at the.

[Eric Wemple]

I don't doubt that there are meaningful losses.

[Peter Kafka]

And you think the primary reason, and it sounds a lot like a lot of the tech companies during and Post pandemic is, oh, we hired too many people and now we've got to let some of them go. It can be as simple as that.

[Eric Wemple]

Can it be as simple as that?

[Peter Kafka]

Yeah.

[Eric Wemple]

No, I don't think so. Especially if you look at the more recent past when they tinkered with the product, tinkered with the opinion side and sort of shot themselves in the foot.

[Peter Kafka]

Yeah. So let's talk about that. So they. So the last few years after the Post had supposedly been losing money, Bezos brings in new management. Will Lewis from the UK tells everyone no one's reading their stuff. And there are then a series of cuts, buyouts. At one point, you leave in the last year. And then around the same time, Jeff Bezos starts saying, you know how I was fighting with Donald Trump during his first administration? Actually, Donald Trump turns out to be a really good guy. I think he's gonna be a great president. He says that on stage with Andrew Ross Sorkin at the New York Times event, November 2024, agrees to buy the Melania Doc does a whole lot of pivoting towards Trump. And some of that shows up with the work he's done at the Post, which is a real distinction. Right. Because he really did keep Amazon separate from other Jeff Bezos ambitions and now, it seems like from the outside that there are things about Jeff Bezos, his business life, Amazon Blue Origin, his rocket company. It seems like he is tilting the Washington Post to make Donald Trump happy and to make Jeff Bezos other businesses work better in Trump 2.0. Is that a reasonable summary?

[Eric Wemple]

Well, I think, I think we need to be pretty precise in the answer in the sense that I don't see any evidence that he has intervened in the news side. The news side has really been. And we would hear about it if it did, because journalists are not. They don't keep those thoughts to themselves.

[Peter Kafka]

They blab. A media beat is a fun beat.

[Eric Wemple]

That's correct. So on the news side, I still don't see it. And the coverage, I think, speaks to their independence.

[Peter Kafka]

Yeah. I mean, I want to point out that even after Bezos had been making gooeys at Trump for a while, I mean, the Post is the paper that ran the story on the double tap last fall in Venezuela where they Just after Thanksgiving.

[Eric Wemple]

Yep.

[Peter Kafka]

Yeah. May have committed a war crime. And then. And the Washington Post reported on that, essentially broke that story.

[Eric Wemple]

Right. Which is part of a year long, sort of like string of scoops from the national security Pentagon team. Really remarkable about that, you know, we're talking about.

[Peter Kafka]

Right. So if you're in a world where you think Jeff Bezos is doing this solely to make Donald Trump happy, there's a lot of evidence that says that's not happening.

[Eric Wemple]

Tons. Like, like URLs out the wazoo. Yeah. So that's one thing. But on the opinion side, and I'll give a full disclosure, I was on the opinion side. He has a prerogative, a traditional sort of newspaperman's right or privilege or protocol to mess with the opinion page and to steer and guide the opinion page, its outlook and everything it does. That's just been the way it has unfolded.

[Peter Kafka]

I own this newspaper. The opinion section should reflect the way I, I think if I wanted to.

[Eric Wemple]

Yeah. No taxes. So anyway, so what he did on the opinion side, I think is worth commenting on. Starting in October 2024, when he and Will Lewis Bezos, through Will Lewis, decreed that the Post would not be endorsing a candidate in the 2024 presidential election. That happened 11 days before the election and that happened after the Washington Post editorial board had worked up, had drafted an editorial in favor of Kamala Harris, and hell broke loose. A subscription. Desertion of hundreds of thousands, hundreds of

[Peter Kafka]

thousands is an astonishing number. I remember when I think it was David Folkenflick from npr. And every time I saw those numbers, I thought, those numbers have to be wrong. David's a very good reporter, but he must have been misguided. Here. Someone. There's no way that. There's no way that many people turned off their subscriptions. It just doesn't happen.

[Eric Wemple]

Every one of us had the same reaction. And so I was waiting for. Because I worked at the Post, I didn't know where he got this. This is magical. And I was thinking, okay, let's wait for the Post's denial. And it never came. It never came. So Falken Flick nailed that story. First, he had 200,000, and later he figured out that an additional 50,000 at least had deserted the Post. And the cause and effect. Peter could not have been more direct. It happened directly after this, and people said, no way. I'm not giving my money to this organization.

[Peter Kafka]

It's like a surgeon coming in and someone's got, I don't know, a busted leg, and they say, well, it's better if we just cut the leg off. That's how we're gonna solve it.

[Eric Wemple]

That's not a bad. That's not a bad analysis.

[Peter Kafka]

I don't know if I completely get right, but he was. So this Jeff Bezos ordered decision to not endorse Kamala Harris, which reads like a de facto endorsement of Trump, costs the Washington Post real money.

[Eric Wemple]

Real money. And people, you know, since journalists are always working in fear of getting that email about, you know, staff reductions or some other doom from management, they were at the time. I remember people saying, you know, you need to hold us blameless for this because this is a wound that we. That not authored by us. Our bylines aren't on this screw up, up, this up. It's not. It's not on our, you know, on our ledger. So don't. Don't include this on whatever in whatever calculation you do when you sort of figure out your staffing level down the road.

[Peter Kafka]

He'll be right back with Eric Wemple. But first, a word from a sponsor. Yo, Harvey, Zoe. Group selfie.

[Podcast Host (Explain It To Me)]

Oh, nice.

[Peter Kafka]

New iPhone 17.

[Eric Wemple]

Drew ski.

[Peter Kafka]

Let's do a triangle formation. I'm in front with a center stage front camera.

[Podcast Host (Explain It To Me)]

Everyone fits in the shot.

[Peter Kafka]

But switching takes forever.

[T-Mobile Advertiser]

Not anymore.

[Podcast Host (Net Worth and Chill)]

Now you can switch to T mobile in just 15 minutes.

[Peter Kafka]

Focus, people. Nail your pose.

[Eric Wemple]

And you get a new iPhone 17 on them.

[Peter Kafka]

No way.

[T-Mobile Advertiser]

Yes way.

[Eric Wemple]

No way. Yes way. Guys, switch to T mobile and get iPhone 17 on us.

[Peter Kafka]

And right now, we'll pay off your old phone up to 800 bucks.

[Podcast Host (Explain It To Me)]

I'm grabbing my phone and switching to

[Peter Kafka]

T Mobile right now. Get back Harvey. We're taking a let's go again Y'.

[T-Mobile Advertiser]

All with 24 monthly bill credits Finance Agreement 256 gigabytes $830 eligible trade in example iPhone 13 and new qualifying line $60 plus per month Plan with auto pay plus taxes and fees for well qualified customers plus tax and $35 device connection charge credit tend and balance due if you pay off earlier. Cancel contact US$800 via virtual prepaid card card typically take 15 days after rebate submission. No cash access and Card expires in 6 months. Check out in 15 minutes per line.

Visit T mobile.com hey Kara Swisher here. I want to let you know that Vox Media is returning to south by Southwest in Austin for Live T Favorite podcast. Join us from March 13th through the 15th for live tapings of Today Explained Teffy Talks, Prof. G Markets and of course your two favorite podcasts Pivot and On with Kara Swisher. The stage will also feature sessions from Brene Brown and Adam Grant, Marques Brownlee, Keith Lee, Vivian Tew and Robin Arzon. It's all part of the Vox Media Podcast stage at south by Southwest presented by Odoo. Visit voxmedia.comsxsw to pre register and get your special discount on your innovation badge. That's voxmedia.comsxsw to register. Really, you should register. We sell out and we hope to see you there.

[President Trump]

This is what President Trump had to say about why the United States is at war with Iran.

[Peter Kafka]

We saw repeatedly to make a deal. We tried. They wanted to do it, they didn't want to do it again. They wanted to do it, they didn't want to do it. They didn't know what was happening.

[President Trump]

Not the best explanation for a war of choice, sir. I'm personally a do my own research kind of guy, but let's Ask AI why We're at War with Iran Chat the United States attacked Iran in 2026 because it claimed Iran posed an imminent threat, particularly due to Iran's administration advancing nuclear program and missile capabilities and aim to reduce Iran's ability to project power in the region.

[Peter Kafka]

Wow. That.

[President Trump]

That was a better explanation. Thanks Chat. Fitting that AI was more clear than the President of the United States because it turns out the United States is using AI to fight the war in Iran. The future of war is AI and that future is now. Here you can find out whether or not you should be freaking out over in the Today Explained feed.

[Peter Kafka]

And we're back in the context of Bezos tilting towards Trump. In that Matt Murray memo I referenced. Up top of this discussion, there's a line in the Murray memo. He's praising a lot of the work they do, but he's saying, we also have some problems. You know, our video isn't working. We're not making up stories. And there's this line. Even as we produce much excellent work, we too often write from one perspective for one slice of audience. What do you make of that line? It's kind of an aside. But as you're explaining how you're reorienting the paper and you're saying, actually, we're. We're. We have. You're suggesting we're biased in some way or we're. We're not shooting the news straight, what do you make it? It almost sounds like what David Ellison and Barry Weiss say when they say why they want to remake CBS News. But we haven't heard that discussion talking about the Post besides its opinion pages. Does that mean we should expect the Post News report to change in some sort of ideological way?

[Eric Wemple]

I don't know. But, like, you know, like, if Matt Murray or any of his top editors had actually edited that memo, they would have asked for specifics and they would have put a big question mark alongside that and say, what the hell are you talking about here? Okay, why are you speaking in such elliptical language? Why are you, like, trying to, like, whisper to the newsroom some message that you're not willing to articulate? So I saw that, too, and I'm like, oh, man, we need to ask him exactly what he's saying. I think that that is coded language, and I think that, you know, it could be political. Yes, it's obvious, obvious that it could be political. But I think the thing is, like, what does that mean for your story selection? What about the front pages, Mr. Murray? Have you been putting out that you don't like? I mean, it's a strange thing for the executive editor to be saying. It's almost as if he's asking for some force to adjust the newsroom sort of cadence or tempo and its sensibility when he has the power to do that. You know what I mean? It's like, oh, well, I wonder who would have the authority to do that.

[Peter Kafka]

O.J. searching for the real killer.

[Eric Wemple]

Why? Why?

[Peter Kafka]

Just pure speculation at this point. Why does Jeff Bezos own the Washington Post? He bought. It's obviously not core to what he does. It seems to be nothing but headache for him. The last few years, it doesn't seem like it helps him curry favor with Donald Trump. At best, it's something he can tell. Donald Trump isn't a problem, but it's not like he's using it to buy the Melania documentary for $75 million. What is the upside for him and why does he continue to own it? It, do you think?

[Eric Wemple]

I have to preface this with I have no idea, because I really don't. And that is something that all of us in this sort of media trade in this particular niche have been trying to figure out. And it is entirely a black box. I can tell you from having seen, been around the Post and seen him interact a little bit many years ago, he seems, seemed to be deriving a great deal of satisfaction from this. I mean, he showed up at Ben Bradlee's funeral with all the dignitaries. I believe Woodward sort of like, suggested he come. So there was a close bond between the old guard, the Washington Post establishment, and Bezos. I'm not so sure that that is as strong as it once was. In fact, I'm pretty sure it isn't as strong as it once was. So I think that probably the sort of enjoyment he got from his association with this institution, that has faded. I think it's probably faded. But I think that, you know, who was. Was it Louis or was it Bezos? I'm forgetting right now who said, we saved the Washington Post once, we're going to save it again. It's one of the two.

[Peter Kafka]

That was Bezos on stage.

[Eric Wemple]

That was Bezos on stage. Right. So, like, so there's another challenge, right? So I guess that that would be something that he would derive some pleasure from. And I would imagine that, again, if he wanted to get really sort of involved and engaged the way he was back in 2013, 2014, 2015 and so on, that the newsroom would welcome that. That.

[Peter Kafka]

Let's talk about where the Post goes next. One of the things I like to point out a lot on this podcast and my writing, is that a lot of the success stories we hear about in digital media these days are specifically publications that are focused largely or entirely on Washington, D.C. politico, Axios, Punchbowl, Semaphore, some of them have direct DNA from Washington Post, like you mentioned, like Politico came directly out of. Out of the Post. They built these really big businesses. The Post should own that space by rights. Right. It's this dominant paper in Washington, D.C. is there any chance of the Post reclaiming any of that either through an actual acquisition of One of these companies or just by really focusing on the ins and outs of Washington D.C. policy, of what's happening on K Street, et cetera. Is that a possibility for them?

[Eric Wemple]

I love this question because I think it shows a real, real familiarity with what has gone on in D.C. for a real long time. And that is that these Washington based publications that are sort of, that have one foot in sort of like gossipy Washington and one foot in policy Washington have been very successful and a lot of them have, have done it through events and, and I mean by sponsored events, that has really helped their business model and you know, obviously their ethical, ethical concerns about, you know, having, you know, major lobbies sponsoring your events. The Post.

[Peter Kafka]

But that is how business is done. At least for now.

[Eric Wemple]

It is how business is done. The Post I think has done a pretty good job of that. They've had great events over the years. I don't know exactly where the events business is now, but when I started at the post in 2011, I asked the then president of the organization, Steve Hills, why the Post hadn't launched something akin to Politico Pro. I think Politico Pro had recently started, or at least they were advertising had started. And this is. Politico Pro is a service that is exclusively for lobbyists and DC insiders with a lot of money.

[Peter Kafka]

Yeah, it's thousands of dollars for subscription and it is the thing that powers Politico.

[Eric Wemple]

It is remarkable. They gave me. Here, take a look. We'll give you a one day pass to look at it. It's a remarkable service. There's everything you could ever want in there. There's exclusive content. I don't mean to be broadcasting an advertisement for Politico Pro, but it's something completely different from Politico. And you know that if you're paying for it. And it's also adjacent to Politico. Right. Because a lot of the people who work on Politico Pro can go do regular sort of like general interest stor after a while on Political Pro, they'll put them up on the main site. It's really, really close. There's a great proximity in terms of the content. And I asked the Post, why aren't you doing this? And the answer I got back then was that's not what we do. And I was a new employee. It was just like one of these meet the President sort of things. So I didn't want to, but I was like, maybe that's what we should be doing. So they have this Washington Post intelligence thing now, which is sort of akin to that. I don't know if there are new streams of revenue opening up at the Post, and I think that that's one of the reasons that the staff is so disaffected and so disappointed in the current management is that they don't necessarily see any sort of, like, any progress towards, oh, we're going to do this new business, we're going to start this, we're going to launch this, and it has real prospects to.

[Peter Kafka]

They're just seeing cuts, cut after cut.

[Eric Wemple]

I think they're seeing cuts and they're seeing. And they're also a fair amount of silence. I don't think that they're getting the feedback from management that I think that quite frankly, they deserve.

[Peter Kafka]

Sort of suggests maybe there is no plan and you've pretty much laid it out, but because you've worked at the Post until just recently, you should have better insight than most. Is there any optimism for the folks who are remaining? Is there anyone saying, you know what, this is brutal, but lots of companies have the problems we have and the only way we were going to survive is to go through this, this really difficult time and maybe this could work out. Is there anyone uttering anything remotely like that?

[Eric Wemple]

I've spoken to a lot of people just in the past few weeks. I haven't heard it. I haven't heard that sentiment. And I think that's because, I mean, look, just to be fair, sometimes I'm not saying it's these Post journalists. Sometimes journalists are too, I think, dismissive and don't understand the sort of obstacles and the problems faced by management of a 21st century newspaper. And like, I think, Don, nobody's really figured out the problem of how to transition a regional newspaper into like this thriving beast of a news organization. I mean, like Salt Lake Tribune and the Philadelphia Inquirer and some other papers out there are starting to find a footing. They're using philanthropic sources for like a third leg on the revenue stool. Good, excellent. But still, like, breakthroughs in this area are few and far between. So I think that that's one thing. When I was there, I never tried. I never wanted to be the guy standing up and say, why aren't you getting more revenue and stuff? Because I just didn't think that I could do it, for example, and I didn't have any better ideas, quite frankly. Okay, So I want to make that clear. But still, that's their job. And I think that the Post staffers do not believe that there isthey don't see a lot of creativity. They don't see a lot of initiative. And I think that's an enormous problem. Problem, if you understand what I'm saying.

[Peter Kafka]

I do. Let's leave it with one more projection with all the caveats saying you're a reporter, not a, not a soothsayer. In a year from now, is the Washington Post the same size it is currently now, or do you think they come back and go, you know what, we still got a cut because it's still not working.

[Eric Wemple]

I have to do a prediction. I'm going to say they're going to stay steady. And that's just, that's as much of a hope as a prediction.

[Peter Kafka]

But flat is the new up.

[Eric Wemple]

We'll take it. Flat is the new up. Yeah. And it's interesting because you have four or 500 people, I guess around 500 people now, and that's still a pretty powerful newsroom. You can do a lot of stuff with 500 people in the newsroom. But I do think that you can do more. If you're moving upward toward 500, then you're moving downward, scaling back to 500. Do you know what I'm saying? I mean, it's just.

[Peter Kafka]

I do know what you're saying.

[Eric Wemple]

Yeah.

[Peter Kafka]

So, Eric Wemple, formerly of the Washington Post, now the New York Times. Thank you for joining us. I really appreciate it.

[Eric Wemple]

Appreciate it. Have a good one.

[Peter Kafka]

Thanks again to Eric Wemple, who I have loved reading Forever. A real treat to have him on. Thanks to Charlotte Silver, who busts her ass to get these newsy podcasts turned around and into your ears. Thanks to our sponsors. Thanks to you guys. See you again next week. It.