Jeff Bezos and Amazon are not the same person. This is an important distinction.
No doubt you can point to some Amazon PR to prove it. In reality, they're one and Bezos has done whatever he wanted till now (how many years was AMZN losing money to expand???).
You can also say "Here's an WP article slamming Amazon," but maybe the old WP would have written 5 such articles. I have no doubt that self-censorship goes on at WP just as it went with NBC /GE /Comcast and so on. They know who owns the paper and if someone has to remind them, it will be done.
Of course, you can be independent and think, but....
You can make up whatever reality you want. Suggesting Bezos abuses his influence at WaPo to benefit Amazon has nothing to do with Google deciding to stop doing business with an organization that began working against Google's interest.
You ascribe malicious intent when it's just really organizational dynamics. Most suppression of dissent is self-censorship. Most folks know when they're about to bite the hand that feeds them.
Yes, Jeff Bezos. The implication that Bezos abuses his position to favor one organization over the other has no clear basis in fact. It is also not relevant to the story about Google taking action in Google's favor.
The difference being Eric Schmidt and Google took an action. Eric Schmidt and some other business he owns did not.
The action was against an organization that Google was doing business with because the arrangement no longer made sense for Google. A think tank and a newspaper are not the same thing. There is no expectation of integrity from a think tank.
The original comparison suggests Amazon is abusing influence to control the narrative at WaPo in the absence of any evidence of such abuse.
In an older version of the claims[0], it was Eric Schmidt (as individual), Eric Schmidt's family foundation and Google who were listed as donors that might drop out.
That older version was also much less clear on what was "threatened".
That guy is using outrage as marketing vehicle to raise funds and awareness for his (now "independent") think tank. It'll be interesting to see who's funding his work in a year or so.
