Owner’s Decision Aligns With Past Actions

Amid a historically crucial election, The Los Angeles Times editorial board was expected to endorse Vice President Kamala Harris, but reports suggest that billionaire entrepreneur and medical doctor Soon-Shiong, who acquired the paper in 2018, blocked the endorsement.

Soon-Shiong’s decision mirrors a previous instance in 2020 when he prevented the endorsement of Senator Elizabeth Warren during the Democratic primaries. Despite this, the newspaper did ultimately express its support for Joe Biden in the general election that year.

This latest decision has piqued wide interest, especially since the publication has, since 2008, aligned itself with Democratic candidates consistently, marking a significant deviation from its usual practice.

Editorial Independence Raises Questions

While the paper refrained from endorsing any presidential candidate, it continued to back progressive positions on various issues, as well as Democratic representatives in other electoral contests, notably endorsing Congressman Adam Schiff.

This dichotomy within the paper’s endorsements has led to speculation regarding the rationale behind the owner’s decision to halt presidential endorsements, a course of action not elaborated upon in public statements.

A spokesperson for The Los Angeles Times stated, “We do not comment on internal discussions or decisions about editorials or endorsements.” This sentiment leaves much to interpretation regarding the motives behind the non-endorsement stance.

Contrasting Media Practices in 2024 Elections

The 2024 U.S. presidential race has seen varied responses from media outlets, with many aligning themselves with specific candidates. Although several newspapers have endorsed Harris, she lost the prior support previously given to President Joe Biden.

This reluctance from certain groups and publications is further underscored by the decision of significant labor organizations like the International Brotherhood of Teamsters and the International Association of Fire Fighters, which chose not to endorse any candidate, in stark contrast to their 2020 support for Biden.

Despite these shifts, the editorial decision by Soon-Shiong has dominated discussions, drawing attention to the broader implications of media endorsements and the independence of editorial boards in major publications.

Historical Dynamics and Current Implications

The Los Angeles Times has a storied history of voicing its political preferences, regularly backing Democratic candidates in presidential elections.

This year’s absence from the presidential endorsement scene suggests a recalibration of its traditional role in political discourse.

In 2017, Soon-Shiong's attempt to gain a senior position within the Trump administration was unsuccessful, a fact that adds further layers to the understanding of his political engagements and interests, potentially informing the decision not to extend an endorsement.

Although the editorial board was reportedly ready to endorse Harris, the paper ultimately refrained from taking a stance. Terry Tang noted this development, highlighting the paper's inability to issue a presidential endorsement.

Conclusion on Editorial Changes and Impact

Paul Thornton commented intriguingly, underscoring that decisions within the publication “didn't just fall out of a coconut tree,” implying a level of deliberation or external influence in shaping endorsement policies.

This controversy over editorial decisions highlights the intricate dynamics of media influence in elections, with The Los Angeles Times standing at a crossroads, reflecting broader tensions between editorial autonomy and ownership interests.

As the 2024 presidential race heats up, this development continues to generate discussion regarding the role of media endorsements and the potential for shifts within traditional practices of political alignment by major publications.