SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Former NYC Mayor and democratic presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg opens a local campaign field office in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania on December 21, 2019. (Photo: Bastiaan Slabbers/NurPhoto via Getty Images)
Despite Vow Not to Probe Billionaire Owner's 2020 Rivals, Bloomberg News Runs 'Ridiculous Hit Piece' on Warren and Sanders
"Hit pieces on progressive candidates become questionable when run by a news outlet owned by one of their rivals. This as much as anything shows why Bloomberg must sell Bloomberg News."
Dec 23, 2019
Bloomberg News on Monday was accused of violating its month-old vow not to investigate billionaire owner Michael Bloomberg or his 2020 Democratic presidential rivals after the outlet published an article criticizing Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren for buying office supplies from Amazon--the retail behemoth both have criticized for low wages and poor working conditions.
The story, headlined "Sanders, Warren Campaigns Spend the Most on Amazon While Trashing It," was denounced as an absurd attack on two of the most vocal opponents of Bloomberg's candidacy.
"Less than a month after Bloomberg said a conflict of interest meant it wouldn't investigate 2020 Dem candidates, Bloomberg publishes a ridiculous hit piece on Mike Bloomberg's biggest critics in the race."
--David Sirota, Sanders speechwriter
"Less than a month after Bloomberg said a conflict of interest meant it wouldn't investigate 2020 Dem candidates, Bloomberg publishes a ridiculous hit piece on Mike Bloomberg's biggest critics in the race (and yes, the story is utterly ridiculous)," David Sirota, a speechwriter for the Sanders campaign, tweeted Monday.
Sirota was referring to Bloomberg News' pledge last month to not investigate Bloomberg or his 2020 Democratic primary opponents now that the former New York mayor is vying for the presidency.
"We will continue our tradition of not investigating Mike (and his family and foundation) and we will extend the same policy to his rivals in the Democratic primaries," John Micklethwait, Bloomberg's editor-in-chief, wrote in a memo to newsroom staffers on Nov. 24, the day Bloomberg announced his candidacy. "We cannot treat Mike's Democratic competitors differently from him."
Critics said Bloomberg's story on Monday was a flagrant violation of the outlet's vow to remain neutral in the primary process.
"Hit pieces on progressive candidates become questionable when run by a news outlet owned by one of their rivals," tweeted David Dayen, executive editor at The American Prospect. "This as much as anything shows why Bloomberg must sell Bloomberg News, the inability to do so is debilitating to democracy and a free press."
The article highlights critiques Sanders and Warren have leveled against Amazon, such as its avoidance of federal taxes, and weighs them against the amount of money their campaigns have spent on the company's website.
"So it may surprise voters to learn that the eight leading Democratic candidates and Trump have spent almost $600,000 on Amazon in the first nine months of 2019, mostly for office supplies, according to federal campaign records," wrote Bloomberg reporter Spencer Soper. "The stridency of the anti-Amazon rhetoric tends to correlate with the size of the outlay on its website."
The story was immediately and widely mocked on Twitter:
Zephyr Teachout, a law professor at Fordham University and critic of corporate monopolies, tweeted that Bloomberg's article is "a non-story about two amazing candidates using an essential tool of modern society, notably the only two candidates who have hammered home the point that its very centrality requires it to be broken up and regulated."
"Amazon has too much power," said Teachout.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Bloomberg News on Monday was accused of violating its month-old vow not to investigate billionaire owner Michael Bloomberg or his 2020 Democratic presidential rivals after the outlet published an article criticizing Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren for buying office supplies from Amazon--the retail behemoth both have criticized for low wages and poor working conditions.
The story, headlined "Sanders, Warren Campaigns Spend the Most on Amazon While Trashing It," was denounced as an absurd attack on two of the most vocal opponents of Bloomberg's candidacy.
"Less than a month after Bloomberg said a conflict of interest meant it wouldn't investigate 2020 Dem candidates, Bloomberg publishes a ridiculous hit piece on Mike Bloomberg's biggest critics in the race."
--David Sirota, Sanders speechwriter
"Less than a month after Bloomberg said a conflict of interest meant it wouldn't investigate 2020 Dem candidates, Bloomberg publishes a ridiculous hit piece on Mike Bloomberg's biggest critics in the race (and yes, the story is utterly ridiculous)," David Sirota, a speechwriter for the Sanders campaign, tweeted Monday.
Sirota was referring to Bloomberg News' pledge last month to not investigate Bloomberg or his 2020 Democratic primary opponents now that the former New York mayor is vying for the presidency.
"We will continue our tradition of not investigating Mike (and his family and foundation) and we will extend the same policy to his rivals in the Democratic primaries," John Micklethwait, Bloomberg's editor-in-chief, wrote in a memo to newsroom staffers on Nov. 24, the day Bloomberg announced his candidacy. "We cannot treat Mike's Democratic competitors differently from him."
Critics said Bloomberg's story on Monday was a flagrant violation of the outlet's vow to remain neutral in the primary process.
"Hit pieces on progressive candidates become questionable when run by a news outlet owned by one of their rivals," tweeted David Dayen, executive editor at The American Prospect. "This as much as anything shows why Bloomberg must sell Bloomberg News, the inability to do so is debilitating to democracy and a free press."
The article highlights critiques Sanders and Warren have leveled against Amazon, such as its avoidance of federal taxes, and weighs them against the amount of money their campaigns have spent on the company's website.
"So it may surprise voters to learn that the eight leading Democratic candidates and Trump have spent almost $600,000 on Amazon in the first nine months of 2019, mostly for office supplies, according to federal campaign records," wrote Bloomberg reporter Spencer Soper. "The stridency of the anti-Amazon rhetoric tends to correlate with the size of the outlay on its website."
The story was immediately and widely mocked on Twitter:
Zephyr Teachout, a law professor at Fordham University and critic of corporate monopolies, tweeted that Bloomberg's article is "a non-story about two amazing candidates using an essential tool of modern society, notably the only two candidates who have hammered home the point that its very centrality requires it to be broken up and regulated."
"Amazon has too much power," said Teachout.
Bloomberg News on Monday was accused of violating its month-old vow not to investigate billionaire owner Michael Bloomberg or his 2020 Democratic presidential rivals after the outlet published an article criticizing Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren for buying office supplies from Amazon--the retail behemoth both have criticized for low wages and poor working conditions.
The story, headlined "Sanders, Warren Campaigns Spend the Most on Amazon While Trashing It," was denounced as an absurd attack on two of the most vocal opponents of Bloomberg's candidacy.
"Less than a month after Bloomberg said a conflict of interest meant it wouldn't investigate 2020 Dem candidates, Bloomberg publishes a ridiculous hit piece on Mike Bloomberg's biggest critics in the race."
--David Sirota, Sanders speechwriter
"Less than a month after Bloomberg said a conflict of interest meant it wouldn't investigate 2020 Dem candidates, Bloomberg publishes a ridiculous hit piece on Mike Bloomberg's biggest critics in the race (and yes, the story is utterly ridiculous)," David Sirota, a speechwriter for the Sanders campaign, tweeted Monday.
Sirota was referring to Bloomberg News' pledge last month to not investigate Bloomberg or his 2020 Democratic primary opponents now that the former New York mayor is vying for the presidency.
"We will continue our tradition of not investigating Mike (and his family and foundation) and we will extend the same policy to his rivals in the Democratic primaries," John Micklethwait, Bloomberg's editor-in-chief, wrote in a memo to newsroom staffers on Nov. 24, the day Bloomberg announced his candidacy. "We cannot treat Mike's Democratic competitors differently from him."
Critics said Bloomberg's story on Monday was a flagrant violation of the outlet's vow to remain neutral in the primary process.
"Hit pieces on progressive candidates become questionable when run by a news outlet owned by one of their rivals," tweeted David Dayen, executive editor at The American Prospect. "This as much as anything shows why Bloomberg must sell Bloomberg News, the inability to do so is debilitating to democracy and a free press."
The article highlights critiques Sanders and Warren have leveled against Amazon, such as its avoidance of federal taxes, and weighs them against the amount of money their campaigns have spent on the company's website.
"So it may surprise voters to learn that the eight leading Democratic candidates and Trump have spent almost $600,000 on Amazon in the first nine months of 2019, mostly for office supplies, according to federal campaign records," wrote Bloomberg reporter Spencer Soper. "The stridency of the anti-Amazon rhetoric tends to correlate with the size of the outlay on its website."
The story was immediately and widely mocked on Twitter:
Zephyr Teachout, a law professor at Fordham University and critic of corporate monopolies, tweeted that Bloomberg's article is "a non-story about two amazing candidates using an essential tool of modern society, notably the only two candidates who have hammered home the point that its very centrality requires it to be broken up and regulated."
"Amazon has too much power," said Teachout.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.