The third draft of the 'Washington Post'

It is a kind of press Stockholm Syndrome: victims tend to want to resemble their executioners, to see if by imitation they can avoid the scythe they fear. In its attempt to ingratiate itself with the new generations, the Washington Post has for two years been promoting, under various names, what they call "the third newsroom". It is assumed that the first two are dedicated to information and opinion – two fronts that, in Anglo-Saxon journalism, are usually separated by a firewall wider than Aznar's mustache –, and that this third one would correspond to what we usually call content creators. They strive to say that the standards of rigor and verification must be the same, in a clear show of "excusatio non petita". It is evident that today's journalists must know how to adapt to new audiovisual formats and that there are personalities on social media quite capable of acting with journalistic methods. But for the newspaper to now be inflating itself by hiring flashy people on social media while recognized journalists leave is, to say the least, disturbing. The problem of the Washington Post", in fact, is the thinning of its journalism since Jeff Bezos decided to ingratiate himself with Trump. And the owner's interference in the editorial line to safeguard larger economic interests. In recent days, up to fifteen of its articles were agency teletypes. This is an unprecedented proportion, as this used to be the only recourse for a newspaper well-supplied with correspondents across the country and the world. Making videos on social media can be a good way to connect with new audiences, and the Washington Post was a pioneer years ago on TikTok. But everything suggests that it is looking for the umpteenth substitute to hide the weakening of the newsroom from the outside. Another bad piece in the fabric of an institution that is touched, but we hope not sunk.