Washington Post

Excellent reporting. Scoops that don’t appear on the NYTimes I especially like that cooking and recipes are not behind a paywall

Network error. Please refresh your page and try again. Or a funky 404 message

I subscribe to the Washington Post because quality is more important now more than ever, and I find it here.

I only get my Sunday paper about 50% of the time. I do not own a computer and don’t read the paper online. Customer service is terrible. Gives a lot of lip service but no results and no one returns my calls. I am cancellig my subscription.

I love reading the POST online, but on Thursdays in the Home section the sales of area homes is cut short.

Love the Post, but really miss the Print Edition option on the phone. I don’t want the day’s news mixed in w older articles.

I have been an on-and-off subscriber to the Washington Post for many years, as well as a long-time subscriber to The NY Times. I defended the quality reporting of both newspapers for years to my conservative-minded friends who insisted that both newspapers leaned too far left for them to rely on as a news source. I frequently denied the “liberal bias” these newspapers were accused of having, especially the Post. And yet, that has become much more difficult to do over the past few years. Even though my views are left-of-center on most issues, and I’m a lifelong Democratic voter, I feel like the Post has taken a hard-left turn over the past 4-5 years, and that makes it easier for more moderate thinkers, and especially those on the political right, to dismiss the paper as part of the “liberal media.” And while there I still respect The Post for the quality reporting it is capable of doing (and I very much enjoy Kessler’s weekly Fact Checker column, due to the fact that he holds both political sides accountable), it now seems like there are more days than not when I open up the Post’s homepage or read the daily newsletter and I feel that the Post is rooting for a team or tribe, rather than focusing on quality, unbiased reporting. And while I don’t want this to sound “ageist”, it seems like The Post’s newsroom is being run by mostly 20- and 30-something writers who have brought their far-left viewpoints, which were taught to them, and frankly encouraged, at the universities they attended, into their reporting. There are so many headlines or articles I read where it seems like the reporter has decided who the “good” and “bad” people are before they’ve written the story. The 7 Newsletter is one of the most egregious examples of this. For instance, compare how stories are presented in The 7 vs how they are presented in CNN’s “5 Things You Need to Know Today,” and see if you can pick up a strong bias towards a particular worldview. On the Post’s homepage and in the newsletters, one can see bias in the choice of headline writing, which stories are covered, which are not, and which are given the most prominence. While the NY Times certainly had a few years where identity politics had taken hold of their reporting, at some point, the fever seems to have broke, and the reporting returned to being a bit more balanced, and the most important stories were highlighted, regardless of the identity of the people involved in those stories. Unfortunately, this appears not to ha

Post is the first thing I read everyday! I’ve learned over six decades that it the best source, Globally, Nationally and locally.

Whenever you think you really have improved things it’s NOT good for some people. I cannot find the button for the actual paper view. UGH.

The Washington post used to be the Most informed group of Journalists anywhere then Jeff Bezos bought the post and now the Wealthy People Control the Narrative and That’s real bad for America! REAL BAD and so SAD