In Internal Email, LA Times Owner Cites Gaza Among Reasons He Decided Not to Endorse Harris or Trump
In Internal Email, LA Times Owner Cites Gaza Among Reasons He Decided Not to Endorse Harris or Trump
In an internal email sent on November 3, Patrick Soon-Shiong, medical technology billionaire and owner of the Times, outlined some of the reasons behind his decision that the paper would not endorse a candidate for president this year.
In the email, sent to the LA Times’s top editor and the president and COO and obtained by Drop Site News, Soon-Shiong says the policies supported by both candidates—in what is a clear reference to Israel’s brutal war on Gaza—played an important role in his decision.
“Has there ever been a time in our history,” he writes, “when our nation is knowingly providing arms to another nation using those weapons to kill children, women, innocent people and target the press, doctors and medical workers? And policies enabling this are supported it seems by both candidates?”
“We can and must acknowledge concerns for democracy and the Jan 6 episode and the horific [sic] Oct Hamas attacks,” he continued. “But how do we ignore the counter issues of the innocents being killed now? Do we accept that indeed genocide is happening and that we stand as a country of willing arms suppliers and yet remain silent?”
Soon-Shiong’s decision not to endorse a candidate after the paper’s editorial board proposed backing Kamala Harris sparked a firestorm of controversy, prompting three members of the board to resign and thousands of readers to cancel their subscriptions. After The Washington Post’s owner and Amazon founder Jeff Bezos similarly made a decision not to endorse, 250,000 readers reportedly canceled their subscriptions. Bezos wrote an op-ed rationalizing his decision by pointing to declining trust in the media.
At the time, Soon-Shiong’s daughter, Nika Soon-Shiong, suggested that her father’s decision was prompted in part by his experience in South Africa, where he was born and raised. “The temptation is to speak in muffled tones about an issue the international courts have called a plausible genocide. But this moment requires opposition to crimes against humanity, ethnic cleansing, and Apartheid – as my parents did in South Africa,” she posted on X. “For my family, Apartheid is not a vague concept. My father was an emergency surgeon at Baragwanath Hospital in Soweto. He treated students shot by the police during the Soweto Uprisings – where 176 died protesting the brutal system of racial segregation.”
Yet in a subsequent interview with the LA Times, Soon-Shiong apparently denied the suggestion: “Soon-Shiong said the decision was not tied to the war in Gaza and his daughter’s views were “her opinion.’”
However, in the internal email obtained by Drop Site, he clearly references both Harris’s and Donald Trump’s support for Israel’s war on Gaza as factoring in the decision: “history will not look well on us nor on our government’s lack of action at this time of horrific suffering. It was more courageous in not endorsing than endorsing either candidate in support of this inaction.” He also says the fact that the editorial board did not meet face to face with either candidate to respond to questions was a factor as well.
Soon-Shiong also refers to the departure of executive editor Kevin Merida last year, claiming Merida was fired, and did not resign as Merida has previously stated publicly. When contacted for comment, Merida told Drop Site: “I initiated my departure. Period. I decided it was time for me to leave, a decision I struggled with, because of disagreements with the owner over the principles and practices of journalism, the role of an executive editor, how we were structured as a company, and how best to build a thriving L.A. Times for the future. I will let my integrity and reputation as a journalist and leader speak for themselves.” Neither Patrick nor Nika Soon-Shiong responded to a request for comment.
You can read the full email below.
A quick PSA for this evening: I'll be live streaming on Substack tonight at 6 p.m. ET to answer your questions about the election and share a few thoughts on what might happen if either candidate is elected. There’ll be no upside in guessing *who* will win at that point, but it’s worth thinking through the implications of a victory by either candidate. It’ll also be a way to kill some time before polls close. Later in the evening, starting around 6:30pm, I’ll be doing live coverage on the Breaking Points channel on YouTube. After our live stream ends, we’ll get a chat started, where you can argue and commiserate with with fellow Drop Site readers and our reporters and editors. I’ll be in there too, multitasking from the studio (it helps keep me calm).
I’ll be answering questions exclusively from our paid subscribers—so if you haven’t already, be sure to upgrade your subscription now to submit your questions (you can submit your questions as a comment on the live stream post). Or if you are already a paid subscriber and are able, consider an additional tax-deductible donation. We count on readers to support our work.
From: Patrick Soon-Shiong
Date: November 3, 2024
Subject: Fwd: Why Bezos and LA Times owner are right about not endorsing Harris
The article below really explains my motivations well as opposed to our own staff who see nothing else but ulterior motives.
The dark reasons proposed by our staff and columnists that I made the call because I am fearful of Pres Trump‘s retribution is so false. Or worse that I meddle in the paper to raise concerns about Covid and cancer so that I can sell more cancer drugs and need Pres. Trump or the FDA to approve our drugs . This is the sickness of thought that pervades our country and now embellished by our own columnists. I hope they have the courage to resign!
We have to stop being an echo chamber of division.
Could it be possible that my motivations are simply we just want each side to respect the possible positions of the other without some nefarious agenda imparted on each side? The article attached says it well.
Has there ever been a time in our history when our nation is knowingly providing arms to another nation using those weapons to kill children, women, innocent people and target the press, doctors and medical workers ? And policies enabling this are supported it seems by both candidates? Why are organizations like reporters for the freedom of the press or committee to protect journalist not speaking out? See the Doctors Without Borders website. How and why are these not war crimes? Yet both candidates remain silent. The media follows this silence and little wonder why the press has lost the trust of the people.
Why is a collection of 6 or so board members filled with such wisdom that we can endorse one candidate versus the other without meeting either face to face without neither candidate and responding to tough questions from the members of the board. In the same moment this board declined to fully and objectively lay out the good and the bad of both first for all to see?
Are we not capable of objective discussion for our readers to see? And I know we are indeed capable. The No-Labels list outlines future policies easily with no bias
Are we group thinkers following the crowd? The fact that for the past 3 years we wrote negatives on one but nothing ( since nobody knew her) of the other candidate, automatically means that the candidate for which we know little is the candidate we therefore endorse?
For the first time the records ( good and bad) are available in back to back 4 year stints at the White House. Do we not wish to analyze past actions over the last 8 years from both sides? Do we blindly close our eyes to the possible lives that could have been saved by a more competent and decisive administration? We can and must acknowledge concerns for democracy and the Jan 6 episode and the horific Oct Hamas attacks. But how do we ignore the counter issues of the innocents being killed now ? Do we accept that indeed genocide is happening and that we stand as a country of willing arms suppliers and yet remain silent?
As you can all see I feel strongly about us leading the press and media in trying to be an objective voice of balance and truly speak truth to power without our conformational bias .. and maybe contribute to the healing of the nation.
We as a paper have yet to report the truth about Kevin.. that he was asked to leave early ( terminated) and received a severance .. and not his false [narrative] that he “ resigned under protest” . The irony is after I asked him to leave early he tried for an hour to convince me why he should stay! So much for the integrity of a journalist when he goes on wrap to spew his misinformation.
Begin forwarded message:
From: Patrick Soon-Shiong
Date: November 3, 2024
Subject: Why Bezos and LA Times owner are right about not endorsing Harris
Saw the letters to the editor in LATimes..very little balance as usual.
Perhaps we should publish this article attached as a balance since it is well written and very much reflects my thinking on the subject.
I am so appalled by the ongoing killing of children that is going on daily and we as a nation remain silent…history will not look well on us nor on our government’s lack of action at this time of horrific suffering. It was more courageous in not endorsing than endorsing either candidate in support of this inaction.
Patrick Soon-Shiong MD
Executive Chairman
ImmunityBio
Nantworks
If the LATimes owner's reason for not endorsing either Harris or Trump as the internal email states, I support it. Too bad he did not endorse Jill Stein who opposes the Israeli war on Gaza
He shoud have said so at the outset. Waiting until now is chicken-shit ... pardon the adjective.