The oldest axiom in journalism is that the reporter should never become the story. Its unwritten corollary, rarely invoked in the contemporary era, is that the publisher should absolutely never become the story. Will Lewis, the freshly installed CEO and publisher of the Washington Post, violated that corollary this week as the New York Times, NPR’s David Folkenflik and even Lewis’ own newspaper devoted many inches of hot copy to his conduct, alleging that he has overstepped the traditional boundaries that define a modern U.S. publisher’s job.
The maelstrom seems certain to impede Lewis’ plan to remake the money-losing Washington Post, a plan that includes bringing in two outsiders — one, a Brit, like him with no U.S. newspaper experience — which has ruffled some on the staff. Depending on how the current crisis unwinds, Lewis’ conduct and response may undo him. He can’t very well put out the business fire that is consuming the Washington Post (it has lost $77 million in the past year) if his own pants are aflame. Will Post owner Jeff Bezos want to keep a publisher who is beset with a fast-growing credibility crisis?
The origins of the controversy are both mind-bending and simple. Lewis is named in a complex and unfolding civil lawsuit in Britain that claims he played a role in destroying evidence in the phone-hacking scandal that engulfed British newspapers more than a decade ago. Lewis is not a defendant in the case and has consistently denied any wrongdoing.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member