The left-wing Guardian newspaper, based in the United Kingdom, has turned usual U.S. political fundraising practices upside down. While candidates usually receive campaign contribution windfalls from newspaper endorsements or other high-profile inflection points, the Guardian is instead reaping financial rewards for backing Vice President Kamala Harris for the U.S. presidency. By doubling down on their endorsement of Kamala Harris, the newspaper was able to quickly raise an eye-popping $2 million from its readers.
A five-paragraph note sent to readers by U.S. editor Betsy Reed highlighted The Washington Post and Los Angeles Times‘s decisions not to endorse a presidential candidate in 2024. “Something these two papers have in common? They both have billionaire owners who could face retaliation in a Trump presidency,” Reed argues. She adds: “The Guardian is not billionaire-owned, nor do we have shareholders. We are supported by readers and owned by the Scott Trust, which guarantees our editorial independence in perpetuity.”
The newspaper’s U.S. editor goes on to emphasize that the Guardian—unlike The Post or the LA Times—did, in fact, endorse Harris for president. She stressed: “Fearless journalism and an informed public are bedrocks of our democracy, and it is an abdication of our duty as journalists to sit out this election out of self-interest.”
While it is common for U.S. political candidates to raise money off high-profile media and celebrity endorsements, it is almost unheard of for a media outlet to raise money off their decision to endorse a candidate. However, the Guardian‘s success—generating $500,000 in three days and $2 million in a week—could change the landscape going forward.
