And...there would have been crickets from this same group of handwringers had been directed to endorse Harris.

What a bunch of steaming -------. Handwringers getting pissy because a newspaper is directed to be apolitical.

Don't worry. You still have Mother Jones. Is the Daily Kos still around?

"What is the issue with the opinion part of the newspaper expressing opinions?"

In this case, their boss did not want his paper presenting a political opinion. There is nothing wrong with that. I like it.

I don't see it as being terribly different from the prohibitions on military personnel wearing their uniforms and political events.

"Or is it that the billionaire owner did not want his paper to present an opinion in the opinion section that he did not agree with?"

Very likely, but there is nothing wrong with that. Would you have objections if a paper wanted to endorse Trump and the owner refused to let the staff use the paper as their own personal sounding board?

And it's also important to note that he did not make them endorse a candidate he disagreed with-he very well may have done the same if they had chosen to support Trump-he told them they could not use his paper as a vehicle to voice their opinions. And I don't think "billioniare" has anything to do with it...other than the fact that "billionaire" is one of the negative buzzwords that progressive like to use to throw around to signal their dislike for something. A publicly traded news outlet would be equally smart to do the same.

"Why should not the editors, who are intimately exposed to the news each day, be allowed to express their opinions in the section of the newspaper that is set aside for such opinions?"

IRT the Washington Times, it was about the paper, not the individuals, endorsing a candidate. I cannot speak for Jeff Bezos, but I have seen nothing to believe that he would have fired staffers who endorsed any candidate...speaking for themselves. And they can still do that.

"I mean, what is the fear here?"

What's the fear in remaining apolitical? It's not like the paper is endorsing Trump instead.

I think the anger come from the fact that the paper's owner has prohibited it from being used for an explicitly political purpose.