The LA Times’ refusal to endorse a candidate in the 2024 presidential election isn’t just weak—it’s a disgrace to journalism.

In a moment when the country faces existential threats to democracy, the Times has decided to cower behind neutrality.

It’s not about journalistic integrity; it’s about gutless hedging. This isn’t an era for fence-sitting—it’s a battleground for the future of the nation, and the Times chose to duck for cover.

That’s not a public service, it’s a dereliction of duty.

By refusing to make a stand — any stand, in any direction — the paper has left its readers stranded at a time when clarity and leadership are essential.

Pretending that both sides deserve equal treatment, or worse, that choosing one is somehow beneath them, reeks of cowardice.

They’ve dodged their responsibility under the flimsy pretense of fairness, but fairness doesn’t mean pretending the stakes aren’t real. This is a cop-out, pure and simple.

In a landscape where misinformation is rampant and polarization is deepening, a major newspaper’s job is to take a stand, not hide behind neutrality.

The Times’ decision isn’t noble—it’s pathetic, and it’s a stain on their reputation.

Journalism is about telling the truth and taking positions when the facts demand it. They demand it. This election demands it. But the LA Times failed.

They didn’t show integrity by staying silent—they showed they’re spineless. Cancel your subscription.