In a significant backlash, nearly 2,000 subscribers of the Los Angeles Times terminated their subscriptions on Tuesday and Wednesday, primarily driven by dissatisfaction with the paper’s editorial direction. This surge in cancellations came after Patrick Soon-Shiong, the billionaire owner of the newspaper, declined to permit the editorial board to endorse Kamala Harris in her presidential bid.
Following the resignation of the editorials editor, Mariel Garza, on Wednesday in protest of Soon-Shiong’s decision, the discontent within the editorial board escalated, leading to two additional resignations the next day.
Renowned Pulitzer Prize-winning editorial writer Robert Greene, along with Karin Klein, an editorial contributor focused on education and environmental topics, announced their departures. Greene pointedly criticized Soon-Shiong’s refusal to support the endorsement of a presidential candidate, as well as the billionaire’s comments regarding his decision.
Soon-Shiong, who has owned the Los Angeles Times since 2018, stated in a local TV interview that he believed not endorsing a candidate this election cycle was a necessary move to avoid further political divisiveness in an already polarized landscape.
“I think my fear is, if we chose either one, that it would just add to the division,” Soon-Shiong expressed to Spectrum News, emphasizing his status as a registered independent.
On Wednesday, Soon-Shiong attempted to clarify his stance via a tweet, suggesting that the editorial board publish a balanced overview of both presidential candidates rather than make an endorsement, yet faced rejection from the board.
He further elaborated that the responses to his decision revealed the precarious nature of political discourse in America, stating the reaction to his tweet had “gone a little crazy when we just said, ‘You decide.’”
Soon-Shiong’s justifications were met with skepticism, branded as “nonsensical” by a columnist for Poynter, an organization devoted to media ethics.
Garza indicated to the New York Times that Soon-Shiong’s proposals, as outlined in his tweets, fell short of being a true endorsement or editorial content.
The growing frustration among journalists at the Los Angeles Times is palpable, as they grapple with the lack of transparency behind Soon-Shiong’s decision to withhold an endorsement, which appears to have catalyzed mounting dissatisfaction among distressed readers.
During the spike in cancellations over the two days, a remarkable 1,793 readers cited “editorial content” as their reason for unsubscribing, a number echoed among the ranks of current and former Times journalists.
When approached for comments about the cancellation surge, a spokesperson for the Los Angeles Times did not provide a response.
In addressing the growing number of readers abandoning their subscriptions, Soon-Shiong remarked, “I hope that they understand by not subscribing, it just adds to the demise, frankly, of democracy and the fourth estate.”
The union representing Los Angeles Times journalists reached out to the public on X, urging readers to reconsider their cancellation decisions, acknowledging the deep-seated anger and confusion among loyal subscribers.
“Before you hit the ‘cancel’ button: That subscription underwrites the salaries of hundreds of journalists in our newsroom,” the union leaders emphasized, reinforcing the vital role subscriptions play in supporting journalism.
The sentiment within the newsroom remained tense as journalists expressed serious concern over Soon-Shiong’s choices while striving to fulfill their reporting duties, as highlighted by the union’s statement.
In a notable show of solidarity, actor Mark Hamill, famed for his role in Star Wars, announced to his 5 million Twitter followers that he had cancelled his subscription to the Los Angeles Times, stating that he could not accept silence in critical times.
Hamill’s tweet featured the hashtag #ThankYouMarielGarza, honoring the editorials editor who first revealed Soon-Shiong’s restriction on the editorial board’s endorsement of Harris.
Interview with Mariel Garza: Former Editorials Editor of the Los Angeles Times
Interviewer: Thank you for joining us today, Mariel. The recent events at the Los Angeles Times have certainly grabbed headlines. Can you start by sharing what led to your resignation?
Mariel Garza: Thank you for having me. My resignation was compelled by a deep sense of disappointment regarding ownership decisions that were undermining the editorial integrity of the Times. The refusal of Patrick Soon-Shiong to allow the editorial board to endorse Kamala Harris in the upcoming presidential election was a pivotal moment. It raised serious concerns about our independence as journalists.
Interviewer: Many readers have expressed their frustration over the editorial direction of the Times, evident from the recent wave of subscription cancellations. What do you think this indicates about the relationship between the paper and its audience?
Mariel Garza: The response from our readers is a clear signal that they value editorial independence and transparency. When nearly 2,000 subscriptions were canceled in a matter of days, it highlighted a disconnect between what the readers expect from us and what ownership is currently willing to allow. It’s a troubling reflection of the growing polarization in politics and how sensitive audiences are to perceived biases or lack of direction in major news outlets.
Interviewer: Following your resignation, Robert Greene and Karin Klein announced their departures as well. Do you think this pattern of resignations will continue among journalists at the Times?
Mariel Garza: I can’t speak for my colleagues, but I know there is a palpable frustration within the editorial board and the newsroom as a whole. Journalists have a commitment to provide informed commentary and analysis, and when that’s hindered, it can lead to more departures. I would not be surprised if more of my colleagues felt the need to make similar decisions.
Interviewer: Patrick Soon-Shiong has argued that withholding an endorsement was necessary to avoid adding to political divisiveness. As a journalist, how do you respond to that stance?
Mariel Garza: I appreciate the desire to maintain a neutral space in such a charged political climate, but true neutrality also means allowing for diverse viewpoints and thorough analysis of candidates. Editorial boards exist to inform the public discourse, and by withholding an endorsement, it feels like we are shying away from our responsibility to engage in that discourse thoroughly and thoughtfully.
Interviewer: Amid all this turmoil, what do you believe the future holds for the Los Angeles Times?
Mariel Garza: That’s difficult to say, but I hope that the current leadership reflects on the lessons from this event. There’s a need for a renewed commitment to journalistic integrity, transparency, and engagement with our readership. It’s essential for us to re-establish trust and transparency in our editorial processes if we want to regain the confidence of our audience.
Interviewer: Thank you, Mariel, for your insights during this challenging time. We appreciate your perspective.
Mariel Garza: Thank you for having me. I hope for the best for the Times and its dedication to quality journalism moving forward.
T was necessary to avoid further political divisiveness. How do you respond to that reasoning?
Mariel Garza: While I understand the desire to maintain neutrality, the role of a newsroom is to engage in robust political discourse. By not endorsing any candidates, especially during such critical times, it can create an impression of cowardice or disengagement from the issues that impact our democracy. Journalists have a responsibility to provide informed insights to help readers navigate the complex landscape of political choices.
Interviewer: In light of these tensions, what do you believe the future holds for the Los Angeles Times, both in terms of its editorial direction and its relationship with its subscribers?
Mariel Garza: It’s hard to predict, but I hope the Times can regain the trust of its readership and reaffirm its commitment to journalistic integrity. This situation underscores the critical role that strong, independent editorial voices play in a healthy democracy. If the paper can address these concerns and realign itself with the values that its subscribers hold dear, there is potential for renewal. However, it will require transparency from ownership and a willingness to value the independent voice that journalism represents.
Interviewer: Thank you for sharing your insights, Mariel. The situation is certainly evolving and will be crucial to watch in the coming days.
Mariel Garza: Thank you for having me. I appreciate the opportunity to discuss these important issues.
