If they'd never endorsed anyone, I could see it being a matter of ethics, but just randomly deciding to change an established pattern is lame as hell.
Like, if a journalist publication wants up stay neutral, that's great (preferred, imo). But don't try and backtrack over a decade of partisanship without a damn good reason, and there isn't one in this case. That makes it more bullshit from the owner class, which is business as usual.
Print media and social media website that have literally never made a profit?
With the amount of money they use to buy media conglomerates there are much better investment opportunities, this guy paid half a billion cash for and like another 90 million of assumed debt.
Almost a sixth of the price was bills the company couldn't pay because it's unprofitable.