Much digital ink has been spilled over The Washington Post’s decision to forgo endorsing a presidential candidate this year. The Post frames this as a return to its roots, with owner Jeff Bezos reportedly viewing it as a move to bolster public trust in journalism. However, reactions have been fierce. Some see this as a tragic step away from journalistic duty and a symptom of fears of provoking a potential second Trump administration. Skeptics have derided the decision as clumsy, while reports of subscriber cancellations circulate. Meanwhile, international publications, like the South China Morning Post, seem amused by the uproar.

What these responses miss is that The Washington Post’s choice is not an isolated anomaly but part of a rising trend among newspapers. This movement away from endorsements isn’t rooted in partisan concerns but rather in the economic realities of modern journalism.

Consider the history of non-endorsements among major American papers. Until 2020, the two largest newspapers in the US by circulation, USA Today and The Wall Street Journal, abstained from endorsing presidential candidates. In 2016, USA Today inched away from its tradition to issue an anti-endorsement of Donald Trump, labeling him “unfit for the presidency,” but still refrained from endorsing Hillary Clinton. Although USA Today endorsed Joe Biden in 2020, it has announced that it will return to its non-endorsement stance for 2024. The Wall Street Journal, meanwhile, has consistently opted out of presidential endorsements, with its editorial board offering critical perspectives on both Kamala Harris and Donald Trump. Together, these two papers represent nearly 20 percent of the circulation of the country’s top 50 newspapers.

This trend isn’t confined to these two publications. In 2008, 90 of the top 100 U.S. papers chose to endorse a candidate. By 2020, that number had dropped to 54, down from 63 in 2016 and 76 in 2012. In terms of circulation, the declining impact of papers choosing to endorse is even more pronounced: in 2008, newspapers that endorsed represented about 80 percent of the top 100’s circulation. By 2016, that share had dropped closer to 60 percent and only slightly rose in 2020 with USA Today’s temporary shift into the endorsing column.

So, why are endorsements falling out of favor? The reasons vary, but fundamentally, it comes down to the economics of the newspaper business. Reaching a decision on endorsements can be a distraction, and many editorial boards have concluded that the potential costs outweigh the benefits.

Newspapers depend on readers feeling that they need the paper daily, and that engagement is built on offering everyday fresh, unpredictable information. Presidential endorsements, by contrast, are infrequent and generally predictable. The Washington Post and the New York Times, for example, have a longstanding tradition of endorsing Democratic candidates, in previous cycles John Kerry, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Joe Biden. Meanwhile, USA Today and The Wall Street Journal, which have consistently refrained from endorsements, boast larger circulations than the sum of their several endorsement-prone peers like the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Chicago Tribune, and Minnesota Star Tribune.

Deciding who to endorse, especially in highly polarized times, consumes time and energy from editorial boards—resources that might be better spent on informative opinions that help drive daily readership. There are also potential repercussions for picking sides: the Biden administration and its allies have not shied away from using government channels against perceived adversaries, and it’s well known that critical coverage can impact a paper’s access to White House sources.

As for those reportedly canceling their Washington Post subscriptions, it’s improbable they subscribed primarily for the chance to read a quadrennial presidential endorsement. More likely, they are reacting to having their ideological bubble pricked or attempting, however symbolically, to punish Bezos.

The Washington Post’s decision is not a crisis in journalism but a rational adaptation to shifting economic and political realities. Instead of fretting over endorsements, critics might better spend their time considering how journalism will reform its dying business model.

Learn more: Maine Shows the Way: Low Earth Orbit Satellites Can Rescue the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment Program | The Perils of a Google Breakup: A Warning for American Business | How to Get the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment Program Back on Track | Evaluating State Broadband Efforts: Insights from the Broadband Barometer Project