Everyone’s Endorsed (Just Not for President)!
To: Mr. Steve Grove
CEO and Publisher
Minnesota Star Tribune
650 Third Ave. S.
Minneapolis, MN 55488
Dear Mr. Grove:
Your newspaper declared that it would not endorse a candidate for U.S. president, but instead your new opinion page editor, Phil Morris, announced they would endorse all Minnesota voters! Surprising news indeed.
Morris claimed this was not an impromptu decision but rather a decision to “evolve” and “pause” your long-standing endorsement practice. The decision to “pause” and not endorse in this presidential election was based on a view that voters are not swayed by newspaper endorsements and that, in any case, newspaper presidential endorsements call into question the impartiality and accuracy of that newspaper’s coverage. So it appears that the Minnesota Star Tribune, which calls itself an opinion leader, will exercise that leadership by not having an opinion. This is not an inconsequential matter, and in fact, your opinion page editor is of the view this election is the “most consequential presidential election in the nation’s recent history.” When faced with this most consequential presidential election, what is the response of the self-described Minnesota newspaper of record? Crickets.
The response should have been a full-throated defense of democracy and the First Amendment. Candidate Trump, as has been widely reported, threatened to jail reporters and to revoke the license of various TV networks that have displeased him. He has also referred to the media as the “enemies of the people.” In the face of this frontal attack on the First Amendment (and your business’s very existence), something more than chirping insects is called for.
Now, before taking you up on your offer to help the newspaper “evolve” in its endorsement policy, let us make a few things clear. We are committed newspaper readers and have an affinity for the printed page that knows no limits. We take our cue from the words of Joseph Pulitzer: “Our republic and its press will rise or fall together.” Pulitzer founded the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, which had no problems endorsing Harris. Let me also make clear that this critique of your “paused” endorsement is being written before the results of the presidential election are known.
What is not known are the reasons for this dramatic change. The Minnesota Star Tribune has not carried any investigative articles detailing reasons for the new non-endorsement “pause,” nor have there been any articles explaining that readers’ perception of bias and accuracy have been affected negatively by presidential endorsements. Were Minneapolis Star Tribune readers prior to 2024 clamoring for a change in the endorsement philosophy? Are readers today less influenced by newspaper endorsements than they were, say, four years ago? And if readers today are not swayed by editorial page endorsements, why will they be any more swayed that the paper has no bias by the lack of a presidential endorsement? We can all guess the answers to these questions; they certainly weren’t adduced in the editorial explaining the “pause.”
You apparently believe that potential new subscribers would be put off by a Harris or Trump endorsement. Likewise, at least judging by social media, you may not have estimated the financial impact of metro subscribers who find your non-endorsement too cowardly to support. After all, who can be sure that news articles have not been “toned down”—or not published at all—if there could be financial backlash? This skepticism goes a long way to eroding faith in the trustworthiness and integrity of the entire news-gathering process, which is the core foundation of your business plan. We would argue it is equally central and core to democracy.
Read more from this issue
Refusing to endorse in the most consequential election any of us have experienced also takes the Minnesota Star Tribune out of daily conversation. Being important to the discussion of citizens makes you relevant, and relevancy is also a good thing for your business plan.
We are aware of the movement to cancel subscriptions at various newspapers like The Washington Post and Los Angeles Times to protest their non-endorsement stance. And we say to the readers of this column: Don’t do it. Newspapers face unending financial challenges, and no one gets rich either working for or owning a major newspaper. Losing subscribers weakens the community ties that give us all the sense of community essential to a vibrant state. Reducing staff and reporters because subscription revenue has fallen is not good for our society. Instead, let us continue to help the Minnesota Star Tribune “evolve” in its political and news coverage.
Sincerely,
Vance K. Opperman
Not accepting your endorsement
