We support our Publishers and Content Creators. You can view this story on their website by CLICKING HERE.

The Los Angeles Times announced a few days ago that it would not endorse a presidential candidate this year. That decision apparently was dictated by the paper’s owner, Patrick Soon-Shiong, after an editorial endorsing Kamala Harris had already been drafted. Times editor Mariel Garza resigned in protest:

The leader of the Los Angeles Times’ editorial board said Wednesday she has resigned from her post in protest after the newspaper’s owner blocked a decision to endorse Kamala Harris in the presidential election.

“I am resigning because I want to make it clear that I am not okay with us being silent,” Mariel Garza told the Columbia Journalism Review in an interview. “In dangerous times, honest people need to stand up. This is how I’m standing up.”

Don’t worry, Mariel, your paper has been anything but silent. Garza was commendably candid:

“I didn’t think we were going to change our readers’ minds—our readers, for the most part, are Harris supporters,” Garza told CJR. “We’re a very liberal paper. I didn’t think we were going to change the outcome of the election in California.”

That shows some degree of self-awareness.

It was a much bigger story when The Washington Post announced that it would not endorse a presidential candidate:

The Washington Post will not be making an endorsement of a presidential candidate in this election. Nor in any future presidential election. We are returning to our roots of not endorsing presidential candidates.

The Post’s staffers were appalled:

Public statements from leading Post personalities have been aghast. Columnist Karen Attiah tweeted, “Jesus Christ.” Then, an hour later, “…” Then an hour later still, “What an absolute stab in the back. What an insult to those of us who have literally put our careers and lives on the line, to call out threats to human rights and democracy.”

These people are delusional, but that gives you a sense of where thy are coming from.

At the link, the Spectator’s Cockburn makes an entertaining point. WaPo columnist Jennifer Rubin, who used to pretend to be a conservative, hailed the courage of another L.A. Times staffer who resigned, Sewell Chan:

“Bravo. All respect.” Followed by, “and where are the rest of them?”

After you, Jennifer. I suppose she has no choice now but to walk the plank.

So what is behind this sudden outburst of journalistic neutrality? I think it is obvious: these newspapers have realized that no one takes them seriously anymore. They built up capital in the form of credibility back in the days when they were actual newspapers, published by journalists. For quite a few years now, they have been squandering that capital by acting as rank partisans, Democratic Party foot soldiers. They now realize, belatedly, that their capital, credibility, is all gone. They hope that by becoming officially neutral, they can begin to rebuild it.

Will that approach work? No. These papers’ reporters and columnists have been working feverishly to try to elect Kamala Harris ever since she became the nominee. And before her, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and Democratic candidates back as far as memory reaches. They think that is their job; hence their sense of betrayal when management pretends to be above the fray.

But, frankly, no one ever cared whom The Washington Post or the L.A. Times endorsed in the first place, and no one will care that they have stopped endorsing. It would take decades of honest reporting for these papers to regain credibility with the public, and that is not in the cards.