[deaux]

> The WP reportedly lost $100m in 2024. So one the one hand, you might understand Bezos wanting things to change.

You don't even "might understand" this, because you're intelligent enough to grasp that its profitability as a newspaper was never a factor in Bezos' desire to purchase the WP.

[potro]

There is quite a bit of difference between not making a profit and consistently losing around $100m a year with apparently no path to at least revenue neutrality.

[rapnie]

So it loses pocket change for a multi billionaire?

Edit: The consideration being that perhaps billionaire toys need not be profitable per se, but are purchased for different reasons. Twitter is another example here.

[potro]

A $100m here, a $100m there, pretty soon, you're talking real money.

[ZeroGravitas]

That's assuming the pro-billionaire propaganda it produces doesn't make him many hundreds of millions more.

In that light an arbitrary but vaguely plausible reason to fire anyone who insists on doing actual journalism and not billionaire propaganda is a useful tool.

[bravetraveler]

Y'all are talking about the real Scrooge McDuck.

[cenamus]

Yeah, he could only keep this going for another 2600 years

[surgical_fire]

He could, you know, not have bought the newspaper too. It didn't belong to him originally.

It's not like he will make it profitable anyway.