The picture tells the story: Captured from behind as they walk towards the exit of the boomingly empty auditorium of the Washington Post building are Don Graham, head of the legendary newspaper family, on the left, flanked by his wife and two of his children.
The photograph was posted on Facebook and Instagram by Marcus Brauchli, a former executive editor of the Post, shortly after Graham announced to a stunned newsroom that after 80 years in his family’s hands the paper was being sold to the Amazon founder, Jeff Bezos, for US$250m.
“A brave, selfless act, as hard as any, done with dignity and from loyalty,” Brauchli wrote beneath the image of the Grahams’ final moments in the institution they had so long cherished.
Whether media historians look back on the sale as a selfless act of bravery will depend largely on how Bezos conducts himself.
No one can dispute how hard the move was for Graham personally, for the wider family whose ownership stretches back to 1933 when the financier Eugene Meyer bought the Post in a bankruptcy sale, and for the staff of the paper.
The shock announcement led to an outpouring of sadness and nostalgia from employees.
One reporter recalled on Twitter the congratulatory notes Graham would regularly distribute to the authors of articles he had enjoyed.
“One of the great joys of working at Donald Graham’s Post: receiving a Donniegram in praise of an article. The newsroom’s favorite reader,” the reporter said.
The impact of the Graham era’s passing has rippled far beyond the newspaper building, and even beyond the US capital.
Under the family’s stewardship the Washington Post, arguably even more than the titan of US journalism the New York Times, came to epitomize the heyday of US newspapers.
That reputation had everything to do with Graham’s predecessor, his mother Katharine, who was thrown into the man’s world of newspapers on the suicide of her husband Philip in 1963. Instead of quitting, she outclassed them all. Three years after taking over the helm she was given the closest thing to a coronation in a republic: She was guest of honor at Truman Capote’s Black and White Ball.
Forging a formidable double act with her chosen editor-in-chief, Ben Bradlee, she matched glamor to gutsiness, standing behind her journalists as they negotiated choppy waters. First they succeeded along with the New York Times in batting off the government’s threat of prior restraint on publication of the Vietnam war Pentagon Papers, then in 1972 they hurled themselves into Watergate.
“The whole world was against us, and against her,” says Len Downie, executive editor of the Washington Post from 1991 to 2008. “As important as Watergate was in political history, the importance to us was Katharine Graham’s unstinting and vigorous support.”
Downie recalls listening over Carl Bernstein’s shoulder as the reporter was on the telephone to former US president Nixon’s attorney general John Mitchell when the official issued the memorable threat that if the Post went ahead with an upcoming article then “Katie Graham’s gonna get her tit caught in a big fat wringer.”
“No matter how tricky it was, no matter if the president was opposed to publishing, we always had the Grahams’ backing,” Downie says.
Challenging though they were journalistically, those days were easy at least in one regard — the money flow. From the 1970s through to the 1990s, the Post held a largely monopoly position in Washington, had only three TV networks to compete with for advertising and enjoyed at its peak in 1993 a solid base of more than 800,000 daily subscribers.
Then came the Internet, and the ravages that have been felt by newspapers around the world.
The turbulence that the Post experienced makes for a familiar story, of plummeting advertising revenues and dwindling circulation — down to today’s subscription base of fewer than 500,000.
On top of the general collapse of the economic model, there were mistakes and missed opportunities specific to the Washington Post.
In 2005 Don Graham let a substantial share in a small Internet start-up slip through his fingers: It was called Facebook.
The paper agonized over the best way to build on the Internet. It started well by opening one of the earliest Web sites for a major newspaper, but then conceived the less happy innovation of sticking the Internet newsroom in Virginia, miles away from the main newspaper building.
The Washington Post has also struggled increasingly with a definition of itself, of its readership and of its purpose. Was it a local paper serving the greater Washington area with news about itself, or was it a great national title founded on its political coverage? Amid dithering over the answers to such questions, it let the horse bolt the stable with the departure in 2007 of senior journalists who founded the highly successful specialist news Web site Politico.
Monday’s decision by the Graham family to hand over the baton to Bezos is in itself a tacit recognition that a style of leadership that was eminently suited to the Woodward-and-Bernstein heyday of newspapers may not be the way forward in the current rambunctious times.
As Downie puts it: “Jeff Bezos is from another generation. He may be better able to cope with the outside forces that are battering the newspaper business than the Graham family that grew up in another world.”
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing