The Washington Post has won the Pulitzer Prize 76 times and has a reputation as one of the leading journalistic voices in America. In the films All the President’s Men and The Post, it’s presented as a beacon of thorough analysis, fair reporting, and a steadfast dedication to the truth, no matter the cost.
The Post also has a storied reputation in its sports coverage, where award-winning editors, writers, and reporters such as Shirley Povich, George Solomon, Thomas Boswell, Jane Leavy, Sally Jenkins, John Feinstein, Liz Clarke, Tony Kornheiser, Michael Wilbon, and Dan Steinberg set the tone for how we see the most important sports events and people involved with them.
Recently, owner Jeff Bezos appears to have shifted the focus of the storied newspaper away from an emphasis on truth-telling and towards libertarian-minded efforts, as well as retreating from its longstanding role in American politics to adopt a more conciliatory stance.
That shift had led many of the paper’s top editors and writers to accept buyouts or leave, including Jenkins and Steinberg. While there is still good work being done at The Post, its reputation has suffered as expectations for its place in the modern media landscape have declined.
All of which brings us to an opinion column written Saturday by the WaPo Editorial Board, blandly titled, “Ready for some football.”
I came up as a writer in the blogosphere, where we were often the butt of the “mother’s basement” joke. There were a multitude of talented writers who came up the same way, many of whom have gone on to have long and successful media careers that have justified their efforts. Still, even they had to contend with the assumption that, no matter how good our writing might be, we were not on the same level as the New York Times or Washington Post, and that the editorial standards for such institutions were so high that it was embarrassing even to compare what we did to them.
I can safely say that the quality and value of the Post‘s opinion piece would fail to meet the standards I had for my blog, and I imagine many of my fellow late-2000s bloggers would feel the same way.
“A familiar rhythm returns to American life this weekend,” begins the column. “The razzle-dazzle of professional football is back.”
“…For a few hours each week, the country huddles together. Nothing else in the culture commands as much attention across race and class. More than just a game, football is a civic ritual. Parents pass down traditions and rivalries to their children. In an era of disruption and dislocation, football provides a sense of place and cause for local pride.
…Football blends grit and grace. The elegance of a perfect spiral. The strategy of a two-minute drill. The guts of going for it on fourth down. The kicker fighting a bad case of the yips. The coach’s pep talk at halftime. The second-string quarterback rising to the occasion after a season-ending injury for the starter. The surprising storyline. The snowy playoff game.”
The piece continues in this manner, employing many words but conveying nothing of substance. Many lifeless opinion columns like it are written all the time. Still, it’s the context surrounding it that makes it so offensive to many readers who expect the Washington Post to be a place for enrichment, thought-provocation, and, above all, good writing.
What is this fucking dreck, man. Who is this for. This newspaper used to win Pulitzer Prizes, now the editorial board is taking official positions on things like “can’t we all enjoy a good sporting game of pigskin” in prose that would be clunky for a middle schooler. Embarrassing.
[image or embed]
— Jay Willis (@jaywillis.net) September 6, 2025 at 8:13 PM
This is the scariest thing I’ve read in the new aggressive Bezos era of the Washington Post because once your paper starts running editorials like this they have fully checked out on doing worthwhile work
[image or embed]
— Hamilton Nolan (@hamiltonnolan.bsky.social) September 7, 2025 at 6:29 AM
wait the BOARD wrote this?
— Ryan Nanni (@celebrityhottub.bsky.social) September 6, 2025 at 8:14 PM
Even Steinberg took some time to chide his former employer over what it had become.
WaPo editorial board takes a hard stand: It likes football https://t.co/gOrYRQa6eI
— Dan Steinberg (@dcsportsbog) September 6, 2025
Some commenters suggested that the text might have been written by AI. I’d disagree with that, if only because I don’t think even AI is sophisticated enough to weave so many trite ideas together in this way. If you told me AI helped put together the outline, I’d believe you. The only thing I think we can be certain of is that whoever penned it is a poor writer with nothing to say.
Ironically, one Bluesky poster felt that the article’s cadence reminded them of “Zombie Deadspin,” when the infamous blog became a shell of its former self following the staff’s mass resignation, while its new owners tried to hide behind the site’s well-earned reputation for as long as they could.
Ultimately, there are far more concerning editorials to come out of the WaPo Editorial Board recently. However, as longtime journalist Hamilton Nolan put it above, there’s an alarming quality to the banality and joyless quality to this piece that sends a very clear message about the lack of care those currently in charge of this respected institution have for what they put out into the world.