Why many independent community newsrooms don't make endorsements

By Tracie Powell and Jean Marie Brown

The billionaire owners of the Washington Post and LA Times sparked a firestorm of debate when they blocked their editorial writers from endorsing a 2024 presidential candidate. For The Post—an iconic outlet under Amazon founder Jeff Bezos—this decision triggered over 200,000 readers to cancel their subscriptions. Much of the anger and angst is over whether ditching endorsements was the right call, but it’s worth considering the history and value of political endorsements.?

Should America’s editorial boards still make recommendations on elections? This tradition is deeply rooted in American politics. Abe Lincoln received one of the earliest endorsements from the New York Times on Oct. 11, 1860.?

On the surface, editorial endorsements can seem benign, but they arose at a time when publishers were some of the most influential people in their communities. An endorsement was thought to have the power to sway public opinion. The people making the endorsement were white men who thought they knew better than the general public. But endorsements were rarely a surprise. Historically, the Chicago Tribune endorsing a Democrat is about as rare as a leprechaun dancing down State Street.?

There’s a groundswell of righteous indignation now that ownership is backing away from endorsements — Tribune owner Alden Capital also no longer allows its papers to make presidential endorsements.?

But it’s worth noting that independent hyperlocal community newsrooms’ long-standing decision to stay neutral. Unlike their larger counterparts, hyperlocal newsrooms are deeply embedded in their communities, prioritizing trust and connection in places where traditional news media often falls short. For these outlets, the decision not to endorse is more than just a policy; it’s a strategy to remain accessible and relevant to every corner of the communities they serve.

Here’s why they avoid endorsements and how their approach could offer lessons for even the most storied of publications:

1. Community Trust: Hyperlocal newsrooms are focused on fostering trust and connection, often in communities historically underserved by mainstream media. Endorsements can risk alienating parts of the community who may feel that the newsroom is taking sides rather than representing everyone's interests.
2. Resource Limitations: Many hyperlocal outlets operate with limited resources and can't afford the in-depth research that would be necessary for fair, comprehensive endorsements. Instead, they prioritize reporting factual, balanced news that serves the entire community.
3. Perception of Neutrality: By remaining neutral, these newsrooms can position themselves as unbiased sources of information, allowing community members to make informed decisions without feeling influenced by the outlet's stance.
4. Regulatory and Funding Restrictions: For some nonprofit news organizations, making endorsements could jeopardize their tax-exempt status or compromise relationships with funders who expect strict adherence to nonpartisanship.
5. Focus on Informative Coverage: Rather than endorsing candidates, many hyperlocal outlets concentrate on detailed candidate profiles, issue-based reporting, and holding public forums, which empower community members to decide for themselves.

By focusing on nonpartisan, community-centered reporting, these newsrooms aim to engage audiences broadly and avoid potential divisions that endorsements might create.