{"id":699,"date":"2024-11-11T12:17:08","date_gmt":"2024-11-11T12:17:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.electionanalysis.ws\/us\/?page_id=699"},"modified":"2024-11-15T15:31:34","modified_gmt":"2024-11-15T15:31:34","slug":"newspaper-presidential-endorsements-silence-during-consequential-moment-in-history","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/www.electionanalysis.ws\/us\/president2024\/section-5-news-and-journalism\/newspaper-presidential-endorsements-silence-during-consequential-moment-in-history\/","title":{"rendered":"Newspaper presidential endorsements: Silence during consequential moment in history"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n
\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n

Dr. Kenneth Campbell<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Associate Professor at the University of South Carolina. He is Interim Associate Director of Graduate Studies in the School of Journalism and Mass Communications and Director of Media & Civil Rights History Symposium. He is a former newspaper journalist.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Email: kcampbell@sc.edu<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

U.S. Election 2024<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

51. The powers that aren\u2019t: News organizations and the 2024 election<\/a> (Dr Nik Usher)
52. Newspaper presidential endorsements: Silence during consequential moment in history<\/a> (Dr Kenneth Campbell)
53. Trump after news: a moral voice in an empty room?<\/a> (Prof Matt Carlson, Prof Sue Robinson, Prof Seth C. Lewis)
54. Under media oligarchy: profit and power trumped democracy once again<\/a> (Prof Victor Pickard)
55. The challenge of pro-democracy journalism<\/a> (Prof Stephen D. Reese)
56. Grievance and animosity: Fracturing the digital news ecosystem<\/a> (Dr Scott A. Eldridge II)
57. Considering the risk of attacks on journalists during the U.S. election<\/a> (Dr Valerie Belair-Gagnon)
58. What can sentiment in cable news coverage tell us about the 2024 campaign?<\/a> (Dr Gavin Ploger, Dr Stuart Soroka)
59. The case for happy election news: Why it matters and what stands in the way<\/a> (Dr Ruth Palmer, Prof Stephanie Edgerly, Prof Emily K. Vraga)
60. Broadcast television use and the 2024 U.S. presidential election<\/a> (Jessica Maki, Prof Michael W. Wagner)
61. Kamala Harris' representation in mainstream and Black media<\/a> (Dr Miya Williams Fayne, Prof Danielle K. Brown)
62. Team Trump and the altercation at the Arlington military cemetery<\/a> (Dr Natalie Jester)
63. Pulling their punches: On the limits of sports metaphor in political media<\/a> (Prof Michael L. Butterworth)<\/p>\n\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

\n

This was supposed to be an essay about the frames and discourse in American newspaper editorial endorsements of the two leading presidential candidates \u2013 Kamala Harris and Donald J. Trump, just like my two previous essays in the\u00a02016<\/a> and\u00a02020<\/a>\u00a0editions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The revered\u00a0Washington Post<\/em><\/a>\u00a0changed all of that on October 25th<\/sup>\u00a0when it announced the mind-boggling and mind-blowing decision that it would not endorse a presidential candidate for the first time in 36 years. The newspaper that is credited with exposing the scandal that brought down a president, did not endorse a presidential candidate in the most consequential American presidential election ever. The\u00a0Los Angeles Times<\/em><\/a>\u00a0had announced the same thing a few days earlier, although it would later say in a news story this is \u201cone of the most astonishing presidential election cycles in modern American history.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

More than 5,000 online subscribers of the Washington Post<\/em> cancelled their subscriptions within an hour; by Election Day, more than 250,000<\/a> digital subscriptions were cancelled. The Los Angeles Times\u2019<\/em> editorial page editor and two editorial board members resigned. At the Washington Post,<\/em> three editorial board members resigned; leading columnists<\/a>, including Pulitzer Prize winners, protested the decision, calling it a mistake. More than 32,000 comments<\/a> were left on the website.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On the heels of the Los Angeles Times\u2019<\/em> and Washington Post\u2019s<\/em> non-endorsement decisions, Gannett Media<\/a> \u2013 the nation\u2019s largest newspaper chain, which includes USA Today<\/em> (the fourth largest newspaper) \u2013 announced that its newspapers would not be endorsing in the presidential race. Others<\/a> have done the same, whether in 2024 or before.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But was this all so unpredictable?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the journal article \u201cEditorial advocacy frames explanatory model: An analysis of newspapers withdrawing from presidential endorsements,\u201d in 2016, coauthor Ernie Wiggins and I addressed the disturbing trend of major newspapers not endorsing in presidential races. We noted<\/a>, \u201cIn what has been one of the most consistent public forums for the exchange of ideas, which is considered a foundation of democracy, key voices are choosing silence. And these may be voices that are among the most reasoned and well informed, despite attacks on their credibility.\u201d Since then, the number of major American newspapers endorsing in presidential elections has dropped to about 35, with Harris endorsed by 30-plus and Trump three.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The primary reasons, which Wiggins and I identified back in 2016, are:<\/p>\n\n\n\n