Refusing to endorse EITHER Presidential candidate whilst both approve of Israel's behaviour in Gaza, Lebanon and now Iran. Watch my Victims special going out this afternoon.

looking forward to The Return of AVBB

Ooooh...exciting.

Excellent. I will watch that film. The stills alone look impressive. Love Concertina and Donny Reggae. Thank Heaven for You Tube.

can't agree.
It's very normal anywhere for newspapers to endorse a candidate.

For Christ sake Rupert Murdoch has done it for decades especially in Australia with his ownership of 70% of media (although his endorsements failed in the last GE that Labor won)

The US publications really reek of cowardice with Trump threatening to take away licenses. Scary

Don't agree Hedda. The past use of papers by Murdoch and the Mail was really damaging, in my opinion; the vast majority of voters are stupid and will be swayed. We end up with those who have interesting looks and charisma (like Boris - and Trump) or are prepared to obey media instruction (like Starmer). I admire those US media who refuse to endorse (though I'm sure there will be many Editorials and commentaries).

It depends on the context and I believe both the major newspapers may well be in fear of retribution by Trump should he win.

Trump has said numerous times ..including at his KKK rally..that he will take revenge upon those who didn't vote for him including media outlets who don't support him and has already named one TV network whose license he would revoke.

However I'm not sure how he would punish the 81 million who voted for Biden.

I suppose we should look on bright side knowing Donald Trump wants to be a Whale Psychiatrist because windmills are (tremendously) screwing with the whale's minds.

The Wall Street Journal was going to endorse Harris but Bezos stopped them.

Nothing to do JK with gallantry on the newspaper's past but more like cowardice.

And of course dozens of newspapers around America are endorsing candidates both Harris and Trump.

JK2006 wrote:
Don't agree Hedda. The past use of papers by Murdoch and the Mail was really damaging, in my opinion; the vast majority of voters are stupid and will be swayed. We end up with those who have interesting looks and charisma (like Boris - and Trump) or are prepared to obey media instruction (like Starmer). I admire those US media who refuse to endorse (though I'm sure there will be many Editorials and commentaries).

I'm still amazed that the Sun endorsed Starmer at the election. A huge mistake. It would have spoken more for the real mood of the nation if it had refused to endorse anyone. Makes you wonder why they felt they had to do so.

Rich wrote:
JK2006 wrote:
Don't agree Hedda. The past use of papers by Murdoch and the Mail was really damaging, in my opinion; the vast majority of voters are stupid and will be swayed. We end up with those who have interesting looks and charisma (like Boris - and Trump) or are prepared to obey media instruction (like Starmer). I admire those US media who refuse to endorse (though I'm sure there will be many Editorials and commentaries).

I'm still amazed that the Sun endorsed Starmer at the election. A huge mistake. It would have spoken more for the real mood of the nation if it had refused to endorse anyone. Makes you wonder why they felt they had to do so.

The Sun endorsing Labour just proves how far to the right UK Labour have moved to get Rupert's endorsement.

I wonder how all this play out as the Murdochs wrangle in court as to who will inherit the empire..ultra conservative Lachan or the 3 other siblings who More liberal minded.

To the right?

Check this out; Starmer more extreme than Corbyn. youtu.be/CqEVBynlc9c?si=IC_TKd_Xu0GMR8GV

No10 Mole wrote:
To the right?

Check this out; Starmer more extreme than Corbyn. youtu.be/CqEVBynlc9c?si=IC_TKd_Xu0GMR8GV

Interesting..always preferred Peter Hitchens to his late brother.

Corbyn's policies weren't even that extreme and existed under both Conservative and Labour governments 30 / 40 years ago.