For generations, The Washington Post was the gold standard of serious journalism in the American capital. With its famed exposure of the Watergate scandal and a long history of investigative work, the Post earned a reputation as the paper that held the powerful to account. It was once described as “the conscience of Washington”—a journalistic institution that kept both political parties honest and championed transparency.
But today, that legacy has curdled into partisan priesthood.
The modern Washington Post no longer serves as a watchdog of the elite—it has become a mouthpiece for the elite. Its vaunted slogan, “Democracy Dies in Darkness,” rings hollow when the paper routinely shields one political party, promotes cultural revolution, and suppresses dissent from progressive orthodoxy.
Rather than pursue truth wherever it leads, the Post filters reality through a lens of secular moralism. Its coverage is often laced with identity politics, social justice framing, and performative outrage, all delivered in a tone of moral superiority. Its editorial choices and op-eds read less like journalism and more like cultural catechism for the D.C. managerial class.
The Post doesn’t merely report on culture—it seeks to form it, to instruct its readers on how to think, feel, and respond. And it does so from the presumption that progressive ideology is morally inevitable and historically righteous.
Ownership and Worldview
In 2013, The Washington Post was purchased by Jeff Bezos, the founder of Amazon and one of the wealthiest individuals in history. Although he technically owns the paper through a private investment company (Nash Holdings), Bezos’s influence cannot be minimized.
The acquisition of a major national newspaper by a Big Tech oligarch represents more than a business deal—it marks a fusion of media, tech, and globalist power.
Bezos has no background in journalism. His interests lie in data, control, global markets, and influence—values reflected in the Post‘s increasing alignment with elite priorities.
While Bezos reportedly keeps editorial decisions at arm’s length, the paper’s institutional worldview mirrors that of its owner: cosmopolitan, technocratic, and fundamentally progressive.
Core Ideological Traits of the Post:
- Faith in expert consensus, especially when backed by elite institutions
- Globalist sensibilities, favoring open borders, international law, and economic integration
- Intersectional morality, in which race, gender, and sexuality define authority and victimhood
- Suspicion of traditional religion, nationalism, or moral objectivity
- Hostility toward populism, especially from the political right
The Post’s editorial stance is not merely center-left—it is activist in its progressive outlook. Its opinion section is packed with writers who equate conservative values with bigotry, and its news reporting often uses “facts” as narrative devices, not as neutral observations.
Even when facts are reported accurately, the Post tends to frame those facts with emotionally charged language, selective sourcing, and emphasis that guides the reader toward progressive conclusions.
Typical Claims and Outlook
The Washington Post maintains a self-image of high-minded journalism and intellectual integrity. But in practice, its editorial direction reflects the values of the Progressive clerisy—those who believe they are both the moral and managerial stewards of society.
Its reporting tone is often polished and analytical, appealing to educated readers, but its choice of narratives, sources, and emphases betray deep ideological commitments.
Typical Editorial Tendencies Include:
- Framing left-wing political agendas as scientifically and morally necessary
- Casting right-leaning populist movements as anti-intellectual, dangerous, or authoritarian
- Elevating identity-based grievances as national moral priorities
- Presenting progressive morality as objective reality, and dissent as dangerous extremism
The Post frequently blurs the line between reporting and op-ed writing. For example, “news analysis” articles are often indistinguishable from opinion pieces, especially on topics involving race, gender, religion, and politics.
The Post’s digital platform regularly features “explainer” journalism that assumes progressive frameworks as axiomatic—such as “Why gender-affirming care is essential” or “What systemic racism means.” In these pieces, conservative or religious counterpoints are typically excluded or caricatured.
And though its slogan claims concern for democracy dying in darkness, the paper routinely participates in the suppression of information, censorship of conservative speech, and amplification of narratives from anonymous government sources—especially when it aligns with progressive goals.
Issue-by-Issue Breakdown
The position of a media outlet on these twenty issues serves as good litmus tests to determine whether the outlet belongs on the woke, left, “Progressive” side of the political aisle or the right, conservative political side of the aisle.
It is evident that this media outlet belongs on the left side of the aisle.
1. Election Integrity and Voter Laws
The Post has aggressively portrayed voter ID laws as voter suppression tactics rooted in racism. It frames virtually all Republican-led election reforms as threats to democracy while ignoring or downplaying vulnerabilities in mail-in balloting or ballot harvesting. Questions about 2020’s integrity were labeled “the Big Lie” and those who raised them were painted as threats to public order.
2. Abortion and Reproductive Rights
The Post is fully committed to abortion rights, referring to it consistently as “healthcare” and “reproductive freedom.” Pro-life legislation is described as “draconian,” “medically unfounded,” or “rooted in religious extremism.” The moral case for protecting unborn life is virtually never represented with seriousness or respect.
3. Gender Identity and Transgender Policies
The Post affirms gender ideology without reservation. Articles frequently profile “trans youth,” promote hormone therapy and surgeries, and vilify those who express concerns. They equate parental resistance with harm, often omitting or marginalizing voices from detransitioners, child advocates, or religious communities.
4. Race and Systemic Racism
Post-2020, the Post has become one of the loudest institutional voices amplifying Critical Race Theory themes. American society is framed as systemically racist by default. Stories on policing, education, housing, healthcare, and employment are often filtered through the lens of racial disparities as proof of injustice.
5. Climate Change and Energy Policy
The Post treats climate change as settled science and an existential moral issue. It frames fossil fuels as harmful relics and praises global governance responses like the Paris Agreement. The downsides of wind, solar, or electric grid dependence are rarely reported in depth.
6. Immigration and Border Security
Coverage of immigration overwhelmingly emphasizes the plight of migrants and refugees. Enforcement measures are labeled “crackdowns,” and ICE is routinely cast as a symbol of oppression. The Post frames the border as a humanitarian issue rather than a sovereignty or law-and-order concern.
7. Israel and the Middle East Conflict
The Post attempts balance, but the slant often favors the Palestinian cause. Articles highlight civilian casualties in Gaza, use terms like “occupation,” and minimize the Islamist ideologies of Hamas or Iran. Israeli military responses are described with skeptical or critical language, often suggesting disproportionate force.
8. Second Amendment and Gun Control
The Post strongly favors gun control. It regularly features gun violence data without context on defensive use. The NRA is treated with suspicion or contempt, and “assault weapons bans” are portrayed as commonsense. Gun ownership is often depicted as dangerous or irrational, especially among rural or Southern Americans.
9. LGBTQ+ Rights and Religious Liberty
The Post frames LGBTQ+ issues as human rights and religious liberty as a potential threat to those rights. Christian business owners, churches, or schools that uphold biblical sexual ethics are framed as discriminatory. Faith-based conscience objections are often described as “anti-LGBTQ+ activism.”
10. COVID-19 Policy and Mandates
The Post pushed hard for strict COVID protocols—endorsing mandates, lockdowns, and masking long after scientific consensus shifted. It often cited CDC and WHO uncritically and framed dissenters (even medical professionals) as dangerous. Coverage often ignored the unintended consequences of lockdowns on children, mental health, or the economy.
11. Policing and Criminal Justice
The Washington Post frequently paints American policing as systemically unjust and racially biased. It publishes yearly databases of police shootings but downplays context such as suspect behavior or crime rates. High-profile police use-of-force cases are framed to advance progressive reform goals, often quoting activists more than law enforcement experts.
12. Education and Parental Rights
The Post often defends progressive educational content—from CRT and SEL to gender ideology—against what it calls “conservative attacks.” Parents raising objections are depicted as agitators, often tied to “far-right” groups. It valorizes teacher unions and casts school choice as a threat to public education equity.
13. Censorship and Big Tech
The Post justifies tech censorship under the guise of combating “misinformation” and “hate speech.” It published favorable coverage of Twitter’s and Facebook’s bans of certain viewpoints—particularly regarding COVID-19, election questions, and gender ideology. Whistleblowers who reveal leftist bias in tech are dismissed or ignored.
14. January 6 and Political Violence
The Post labeled January 6 as an “insurrection” and devoted enormous coverage to connecting the riot to Trump supporters broadly. In contrast, it downplayed or morally excused the 2020 BLM riots—often justifying violence as the expression of legitimate frustration. The disparity reveals ideological bias in what qualifies as a democratic threat.
15. Corporate Wokeness and ESG
The Post supports corporations that push DEI, LGBTQ+, and climate agendas. It rarely critiques ESG or DEI from an investor or consumer standpoint and instead frames conservative backlash as bigotry or anti-progress. Its business section frequently amplifies woke capitalism as both ethical and inevitable.
16. Hunter Biden and Political Corruption
Initially, the Post dismissed the Hunter Biden laptop story as questionable and possibly foreign disinformation. It joined other media outlets in ignoring or minimizing the story during the 2020 election. When confirmed, the Post offered delayed and limited acknowledgment—underscoring its role in protecting Democratic interests.
17. Trump and the Republican Party
The Post’s coverage of Donald Trump is overwhelmingly negative. It described his presidency as chaotic, corrupt, and dangerous, and his supporters as either deceived or complicit in authoritarianism. Conservative populists are labeled “election deniers” or “white Christian nationalists.” Establishment Republicans who criticize Trump are praised as moral.
18. Affirmative Action and Racial Preferences
The Post lamented the Supreme Court’s overturning of affirmative action, quoting mostly progressive academics and students. It portrayed the decision as a setback for “equity” and often omitted arguments about fairness or colorblind merit. Dissenters were characterized as lacking empathy or historical awareness.
19. International Institutions and Sovereignty
The Post supports international institutions like the UN, WHO, and IMF. It promotes multilateralism and global governance solutions over national sovereignty. Critics of these institutions are described as “isolationist,” “nationalist,” or “anti-science.” The paper’s editorial board often echoes elite global priorities.
20. Culture War Issues
From drag queen story hours to gender-neutral bathrooms, the Post nearly always aligns with the secular progressive side. Traditional views on gender, sexuality, family, or religious morality are treated as outdated, harmful, or marginal. Articles often assume the inevitability of progressive cultural transformation and cast resistance as bigoted or irrational.
Cultural Marxism and Ideological Influence
The editorial soul of The Washington Post is deeply infused with the framework of Cultural Marxism, even if it never uses the term. It interprets society through the lens of power dynamics, oppression hierarchies, and structural inequities—not individual sin, natural law, or moral absolutes. The language of “equity,” “inclusion,” “systemic injustice,” and “lived experience” replaces categories like truth, virtue, repentance, or liberty.
Every cultural controversy becomes a morality tale of marginalized groups versus oppressive systems:
- Women versus patriarchy
- Racial minorities versus systemic whiteness
- LGBTQ+ versus “religious bigots”
- Migrants versus borders
- The planet versus capitalism
This is not journalism in the classical sense, where a reporter chases down the facts and lets readers think. This is worldview formation through selective framing. The Post doesn’t just tell stories—it helps construct the dominant moral narratives of our time using the progressive blueprint of Neo-Marxist cultural revolution.
Unlike more sensational outlets, the Post isn’t brash or crude. Its authority lies in its polish, prestige, and proximity to power. It writes with the tone of the intellectual elite, which makes it all the more effective at baptizing leftist ideology in the language of reason and justice.
But at its core, this is the gospel of Cultural Marxism: a world divided into victims and oppressors, where salvation comes not through faith in Christ but through activism, deconstruction, and the remaking of all human institutions.
Notable Journalists and Scandals
Key Journalists Who Embody the Bias
- Jennifer Rubin (Opinion Columnist)
Once a nominal conservative, Rubin has shifted sharply left, now spending most of her columns praising Democrats and attacking the GOP with zeal. Her writing reflects the Post‘s comfort with ideological about-faces when they support the progressive cause. - Taylor Lorenz (Tech and Culture Reporter)
Known for targeting conservative social media figures, Lorenz covers internet culture through a leftist moral lens. She has doxxed private individuals for expressing unpopular opinions and often conflates online disagreement with harassment. - Greg Sargent (Opinion)
Sargent writes with the assumption that progressive goals are self-evidently moral. His pieces regularly suggest that conservatives threaten democracy, justice, and truth, reinforcing the Post’s role as cultural referee. - Max Boot (Columnist)
Boot exemplifies the Post’s approval of NeverTrumpers who have largely adopted progressive stances. His writing now frequently condemns evangelical influence, national populism, and conservative skepticism of foreign intervention.
Notable Scandals and Credibility Issues
- Suppressing the Hunter Biden Laptop Story (2020)
The Post initially dismissed the Hunter Biden laptop story as Russian disinformation and failed to pursue independent verification before the election. Its credibility was tarnished when the story was later confirmed by mainstream outlets. - The Covington Catholic Student Smear (2019)
The Post published early, misleading coverage of a high school student, Nick Sandmann, suggesting he was harassing a Native American activist. The full video later revealed a different reality. The Post settled a defamation lawsuit with Sandmann, underscoring its rush to affirm a preferred narrative. - Russiagate Overreach
The Post received awards for its Russiagate coverage but failed to correct its narrative when key claims (like collusion or Steele dossier credibility) unraveled. It played a major role in fanning partisan flames under the guise of patriotism. - Reliance on Anonymous Sources
Particularly during the Trump years, the Post leaned heavily on unnamed sources for explosive claims. While not inherently unethical, this practice—when used repeatedly to damage political opponents without corroboration—erodes public trust.
These scandals are not mere lapses—they reveal a consistent pattern: facts are subordinated to ideology, and narratives are often decided before stories are investigated.
Conclusion: The Paper That Writes the Rules
The Washington Post no longer merely reports the news—it seeks to shape the moral imagination of the public. With its elite credentials, polished prose, and vast reach, the Post functions less like a watchdog and more like a catechism for the new progressive establishment.
Its slogan, “Democracy Dies in Darkness,” presents the paper as a guardian of light. But in practice, its light is a selective beam—highlighting only what aligns with Neo-Marxist narratives and globalist technocratic priorities. Stories are chosen not simply for their factual value but for their potential to reinforce the “oppressor vs. oppressed” narrative that undergirds modern leftism.
This is not journalism as a public service—it’s journalism as cultural formation and enforcement. Readers are not invited to discern the truth but to absorb the approved outlook, where dissenting voices are excluded or vilified, and Christian moral frameworks are marginalized or mocked.
The Post has become a trusted resource for the progressive class—not because it seeks the truth wherever it may lead, but because it consistently affirms the beliefs, anxieties, and ambitions of those who hold power in Washington, Silicon Valley, academia, and corporate boardrooms.
In doing so, it no longer speaks to the whole country. It speaks over it.
For conservative Christians, the paper’s worldview is not just a different set of political opinions—it is a different religion, with different assumptions about human nature, morality, redemption, and authority. Where Christianity offers grace, repentance, and truth grounded in God, the Post offers activism, grievance, and relativism grounded in man.
And while it may appear noble, serious, and just—it is not neutral.
In the culture war, the Washington Post is not a referee.
It is a well-dressed combatant.
And it fights for the other side.
S.D.G.,
Robert Sparkman
MMXXV
christiannewsjunkie@gmail.com
RELATED CONTENT
Concerning the Related Content section, I encourage everyone to evaluate the content carefully.
If I have listed the content, I think it is worthwhile viewing to educate yourself on the topic, but it may contain coarse language or some opinions I don’t agree with.
Realize that I sometimes use phrases like “trans man”, “trans woman”, “transgender” , “transition” or similar language for ease of communication. Obviously, as a conservative Christian, I don’t believe anyone has ever become the opposite sex. Unfortunately, we are forced to adopt the language of the left to discuss some topics without engaging in lengthy qualifying statements that make conversations awkward.
Feel free to offer your comments below. Respectful comments without expletives and personal attacks will be posted and I will respond to them.
Comments are closed after sixty days due to spamming issues from internet bots. You can always send me an email at christiannewsjunkie@gmail.com if you want to comment on something afterwards, though.
I will continue to add videos and other items to the Related Content section as opportunities present themselves.