It’s interesting to watch from the other side of the world the meltdown in US progressive circles about the Washington Post’s decision not to endorse one of the presidential candidates in the current election. I assume this is because it has been common for big papers to do so in past elections.

It’s a different story here in New Zealand, where the convention is that most of the media don’t explicitly endorse a particular candidate or party. Some media make their ideologies and preferences clear, but we know who they are and factor that in when reading them. In fact, it helps us filter our preferences. NZ liberals are very sensitive to any perceived bias in favour of a particular party and if the media did endorse a party in an election, there could be hell to pay!

NZ media aren’t perfect, but it’s a small market and can’t support many large media outlets, so we are stuck with a few outlets. I reckon having a mixture of voices in the big papers is interesting, and helps me understand different points of view. Some I agree with, others I don’t.

So, the fallout with the Washington Post is a curious thing to watch from afar.