Media Ownership and Democracy: Bezos’s Dual Investments Signal Troubling Trend

Two recent developments involving Jeff Bezos have sparked concern about the future of American media and its role in a healthy democracy. On one hand, Bezos-owned Amazon has spent $75 million to secure the rights to “Melania,” a documentary chronicling the former First Lady’s return to the White House. On the other, Bezos’s Washington Post is slashing up to 200 jobs, including most of its foreign correspondents and a substantial portion of its newsroom staff.

The contrast between these decisions—investing in what critics call state propaganda while gutting a pillar of accountability journalism—highlights the growing alliance between concentrated capital and authoritarian tendencies in American media.

Similar changes are underway at CBS News, now controlled by Trump ally Larry Ellison and his son David through their acquisition of Paramount. They installed Bari Weiss, former New York Times columnist and founder of the anti-woke blog The Free Press, to lead the network’s news division. Weiss’s tenure has already proved contentious as she clashes with veterans of storied programs like “60 Minutes” over editorial decisions perceived as favoring the Trump administration. Like the Washington Post, CBS News is also facing newsroom cuts.

What’s telling is the shifting emphasis within these institutions. Weiss has announced plans to focus heavily on “scoops of ideas” and opinion writing while adding numerous commentators to the network. Meanwhile, Bezos declared last year that the Washington Post’s opinion section would focus exclusively on supporting “personal liberties and free markets,” with opposing viewpoints “left to be published by others.”

This prioritization of opinion over factual reporting signals a troubling transformation. Rather than media that seeks to report on reality as it exists, these institutions appear to be creating platforms that shape reality according to ideological preferences. Right-wing talking points, including controversial positions on political violence, are increasingly framed as legitimate opinion that deserves airtime on major platforms.

The trend represents what philosopher Walter Benjamin called the “aestheticisation of politics” under fascism—where politics becomes less about governance and more about performance, channeling and amplifying emotional responses like fear while leaving actual power structures unchallenged.

This shift is evident across tech-mogul-owned media. Foreign coverage—expensive and time-intensive—is deemed expendable when the wider world is portrayed as a place of enemies and freeloaders. Long-form investigations into abuses of power receive less priority than provocative opinion pieces designed to generate clicks and controversy.

The consequences extend beyond journalism. Knowledge about and connection with others becomes diminished under authoritarian systems. Cultural institutions also face pressure, as evidenced by Trump’s takeover of the Kennedy Center and challenges to the Smithsonian. These institutions, once venerated as national treasures, are increasingly viewed by the right as organs of an old regime to be repurposed.

While media organizations genuinely face financial challenges in the digital age, the solutions promoted by billionaire owners consistently trend toward more right-wing voices, privileging provocative expression over substantive reporting, and diminishing the capacity for bearing witness to global human experiences.

The close relationships between many tech moguls and the Trump administration—which has consistently attacked journalism as “fake news” and even arrested journalists—raises serious questions about their roles as media stewards. Their decisions appear less concerned with the long-term viability of journalism than with reshaping it to serve particular political and financial interests.

For a democracy that depends on an informed citizenry, these developments represent a profound threat to the information ecosystem necessary for self-governance.