

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos speaks during an event in June 2014. (Photo: David Ryder/Getty Images)
Media criticism sometimes involves reading between the lines, assessing the layered meanings of journalistic rhetoric, or considering what's left unsaid in a given conversation. But we shouldn't be numb to all the times media problems hit you like a sock in the jaw.
That was the case when readers opened the Washington Post online recently to find a full page "native" ad--that's the kind designed to look like news--from Amazon (Jacobin, 5/27/21). Whose owner Jeff Bezos owns the Post and soon MGM (Washington Post, 5/26/21), among much else.
Blended in with the Post's banner and "Democracy Dies in Darkness" tagline, readers got text about how Amazon supports a raise in the federal minimum wage and has been paying its workers $15 an hour since 2018. A big picture showed an African-American employee and her child talking about how Amazon's generosity is allowing them to move to a bigger home.
Never mind that, as many could tell you, the company was dragged kicking and screaming to that wage increase (Jacobin, 10/2/18); that they continue to fund groups that strenuously oppose a $15 minimum wage (Jacobin, 5/27/21), like the US Chamber of Commerce; that they have vigorously and vehemently opposed union organizing (New York Times, 3/16/21)--and that no wage can justify the dangerous and degrading conditions Amazon is reported to subject many of its workers to (Intercept, 3/25/21).
Just as it was selling Post readers on the notion that it's lifting folks to a better life, Amazon was being cited by OSHA for a rate of serious workplace injuries nearly double that at other employers (CNBC, 6/1/21). A front-page, "truthy-looking" ad about corporate benevolence is surely designed to deflect from such troubling realities.
It didn't prevent the paper (6/1/21) from reporting on the OSHA findings, though that story contained another kind of weirdness we've come to take for granted: a summary statement that "Amazon declined to make any executives available for interviews on its workplace injury data."
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. 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. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Media criticism sometimes involves reading between the lines, assessing the layered meanings of journalistic rhetoric, or considering what's left unsaid in a given conversation. But we shouldn't be numb to all the times media problems hit you like a sock in the jaw.
That was the case when readers opened the Washington Post online recently to find a full page "native" ad--that's the kind designed to look like news--from Amazon (Jacobin, 5/27/21). Whose owner Jeff Bezos owns the Post and soon MGM (Washington Post, 5/26/21), among much else.
Blended in with the Post's banner and "Democracy Dies in Darkness" tagline, readers got text about how Amazon supports a raise in the federal minimum wage and has been paying its workers $15 an hour since 2018. A big picture showed an African-American employee and her child talking about how Amazon's generosity is allowing them to move to a bigger home.
Never mind that, as many could tell you, the company was dragged kicking and screaming to that wage increase (Jacobin, 10/2/18); that they continue to fund groups that strenuously oppose a $15 minimum wage (Jacobin, 5/27/21), like the US Chamber of Commerce; that they have vigorously and vehemently opposed union organizing (New York Times, 3/16/21)--and that no wage can justify the dangerous and degrading conditions Amazon is reported to subject many of its workers to (Intercept, 3/25/21).
Just as it was selling Post readers on the notion that it's lifting folks to a better life, Amazon was being cited by OSHA for a rate of serious workplace injuries nearly double that at other employers (CNBC, 6/1/21). A front-page, "truthy-looking" ad about corporate benevolence is surely designed to deflect from such troubling realities.
It didn't prevent the paper (6/1/21) from reporting on the OSHA findings, though that story contained another kind of weirdness we've come to take for granted: a summary statement that "Amazon declined to make any executives available for interviews on its workplace injury data."
Media criticism sometimes involves reading between the lines, assessing the layered meanings of journalistic rhetoric, or considering what's left unsaid in a given conversation. But we shouldn't be numb to all the times media problems hit you like a sock in the jaw.
That was the case when readers opened the Washington Post online recently to find a full page "native" ad--that's the kind designed to look like news--from Amazon (Jacobin, 5/27/21). Whose owner Jeff Bezos owns the Post and soon MGM (Washington Post, 5/26/21), among much else.
Blended in with the Post's banner and "Democracy Dies in Darkness" tagline, readers got text about how Amazon supports a raise in the federal minimum wage and has been paying its workers $15 an hour since 2018. A big picture showed an African-American employee and her child talking about how Amazon's generosity is allowing them to move to a bigger home.
Never mind that, as many could tell you, the company was dragged kicking and screaming to that wage increase (Jacobin, 10/2/18); that they continue to fund groups that strenuously oppose a $15 minimum wage (Jacobin, 5/27/21), like the US Chamber of Commerce; that they have vigorously and vehemently opposed union organizing (New York Times, 3/16/21)--and that no wage can justify the dangerous and degrading conditions Amazon is reported to subject many of its workers to (Intercept, 3/25/21).
Just as it was selling Post readers on the notion that it's lifting folks to a better life, Amazon was being cited by OSHA for a rate of serious workplace injuries nearly double that at other employers (CNBC, 6/1/21). A front-page, "truthy-looking" ad about corporate benevolence is surely designed to deflect from such troubling realities.
It didn't prevent the paper (6/1/21) from reporting on the OSHA findings, though that story contained another kind of weirdness we've come to take for granted: a summary statement that "Amazon declined to make any executives available for interviews on its workplace injury data."