The Scoop
The Washington Post is paying to remind readers that it is still pretty tough on Donald Trump.
Like many news organizations, the Post pays a small amount each month to show articles in feeds on Facebook and other social media platforms. But on Monday, the paper aggressively ramped up its paid advertising campaign, boosting dozens of articles related to the election.
While the articles about Vice President Kamala Harris were relatively neutral in tone and focused on her innovative digital strategy, her policy proposals, and her chances of winning next week, the articles that the Post paid to highlight about Trump told a different story.
The paper boosted multiple critical articles, including about Trump’s campaign rhetoric, his misstatements, his allies’ attempts to “energize him as he struggles to adapt to Harris,” how his campaign damaged Springfield, Ohio, his fixation on the fictional serial killer Hannibal Lecter, how crowds leave his rallies early, and his questioning of the results of the 2020 election, among other stories.
In this article:
Max’s view
It’s difficult not to see the Post’s move as anything other than a reaction to the massive subscriber departure following its non-endorsement decision last week.
On Friday, The Washington Post announced that it would no longer be endorsing presidential candidates, a decision that billionaire Jeff Bezos said would ultimately restore reader faith in the paper. It was a remarkable reversal for a publication that boosted its readership through critical reporting and editorials about Trump’s presidency, even rebranding itself as a crucial part of the continuation of American democracy. The decision not to endorse immediately sparked a wave of outrage among the paper’s liberal readers, reportedly prompting more than 250,000 subscribers — 10% of the paper’s subscriber base — to cancel their subscription.
Prior to Monday, the paper had run just around a dozen ads all month on Facebook, which largely featured simple Post branding without any mention of Trump. Monday’s paid Facebook push was a clear acknowledgment that the paper hopes to win back some of the anti-Trump subscribers that may have canceled. It’s also a demonstration of just how much the Post is reliant on liberal readers opposed to Trump for revenue. Instead of using the opportunity to boost its tech or culture coverage, the paper leaned more into what it knows converts readers into subscribers: Its critical reporting and op-eds about the former president.
Room for Disagreement
Meta prohibits new ads the week of the election, so the Post was likely getting some new ads up before the company freezes new ad buys. A Post employee noted that the paper promotes highly-trafficked stories that have already performed well, and only a minority of the pieces promoted on Monday specifically mentioned Trump in a critical light.