The Washington Post announced sweeping layoffs on February 4, 2026, cutting roughly one-third of its workforce across editorial, business and technology departments, as owner Jeff Bezos faced a fresh backlash over the decision.
Executive editor Matt Murray told staff on a Wednesday Zoom call that the cuts would hit roughly one-third of employees, without giving an exact number.
The Washington Post Guild said the layoffs targeted more than 300 workers, including journalists, foreign correspondents, local desk staff, the sports and books sections, and 75 from Arc XP, the company’s software division.
Managers began reshaping coverage areas and production teams, including restructuring local news and editing, closing the books department, shrinking overseas bureaus and scaling back foreign coverage.
Bezos bought the Washington Post in 2013 for $250 million cash, promising to pursue truth “no matter the cost.”
His ownership has long made him central to debates about the paper’s strategic direction, and the February 4, 2026 layoffs put that role back at the center of public argument about governance and priorities.
Forbes listed Bezos’s net worth at $243.9 billion in 2026, ranking him third globally behind Elon Musk, while other trackers put his wealth at $257 billion or $238.6 billion.
About 90% of his wealth ties to about 8% Amazon ownership, and he stepped down as CEO in 2021.
Neither Bezos nor publisher Will Lewis attended the Zoom call or commented publicly by Wednesday evening.
“difficult but decisive actions” taken to “strengthen our footing and sharpen our focus on delivering distinctive journalism.”
A Washington Post spokesperson framed the reductions as “difficult but decisive actions” taken to “strengthen our footing and sharpen our focus on delivering distinctive journalism.”
Marty Baron, a former executive editor of the Post, called it one of the “darkest days in the history” of the newspaper.
“He’s not the same person who was there when I was there. He let his business interests get in the way of his management of the Post.”
Baron blamed “ill-conceived decisions that came from the very top” and accused Bezos of Amazon Layoffs: Hundreds of Employees Fired in Restructuring of Amazon Prime Video and Twitch Platforms”>prioritizing Amazon and Blue Origin, saying the ownership changed how the Post was run.
Staff anger and unease spread quickly online as journalists described losing jobs and worried about what the reductions mean for coverage capacity.
Lizzie Johnson, a foreign correspondent based in Ukraine, posted on social media: “I was just laid off by The Washington Post in the middle of a warzone. I have no words. I’m devastated.”
Siobhán O’Grady, the Post’s Ukraine bureau chief, urged Bezos on X: “Hi @JeffBezos. We will never forget your support for our essential work documenting the war in Ukraine. Please believe in us and #SaveThePost.”
Employees had pressed Bezos in recent weeks, with foreign correspondents warning that cuts would hinder coverage of major stories.
Local desk staff also appealed to management, writing, “Don’t eliminate our jobs. Keep the Washington Post a place that covers Washington.”
The Guild said the newsroom and wider operation have been shrinking for years, reporting the workforce has shrunk by about 400 people over the past three years.
Comscore data showed traffic fell to 1.15 billion unique visits in 2025 from 1.23 billion in 2024 and 1.36 billion in 2023, a decline that management and analysts linked to pressure on digital advertising and limits on subscription growth.
The Post’s financial strain included an estimated $100 million loss in 2024.
Those audience and revenue pressures have become a familiar backdrop across the U.S. media business, where organizations have struggled with declining print revenue, competition from digital platforms, shifts in advertising dollars to tech firms and subscription fatigue among readers.
Analysts have pointed to the difficulty of sustaining large newsrooms when ad markets weaken, platforms control distribution and readers resist paying for multiple subscriptions.
At the Post, the February cuts stretched across editorial, business and technology, reshaping not only reporting teams but also the infrastructure that supports publishing and revenue.
Arc XP, the Post’s software division, landed among the targets, with the Guild reporting 75 layoffs there, a reminder that the company’s technology operations sit alongside journalism inside the same balance sheet.
The paper’s editorial reshaping included changes that typically alter what readers see day-to-day, from fewer editing layers to slimmer coverage in books and sports, and reduced overseas staffing that can affect speed, verification and depth.
Baron’s criticism added to a broader public debate that tied the layoffs to questions about what wealthy ownership should mean for job security and investment in reporting.
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) criticized on X: “Bezos just spent $40M sucking up to Trump with Amazon’s ‘Melania’, but is now cutting a third of [Washington Post] staff. The corporate takeover of media is a threat to our democracy.”
Amazon spent $35-40 million on the Melania Trump documentary.
Lewis has also drawn attention for changes in the opinion section, and critics have cited Post-specific decisions alongside industry pressures.
Competitors faced many of the same market forces, including digital competition and shifting advertising, but some have fared better, a contrast that intensified scrutiny of the Post’s strategy and leadership.
Dan Gabor, president of the Washington-Baltimore News Guild, said: “Management has framed these decisions as unavoidable, but they are the result of choices. Choosing to cut staff instead of recommitting. is a failure of leadership.”
Online, journalists and media observers pushed #SaveThePost while arguing over whether the cuts reflected unavoidable economics or an owner’s willingness to absorb losses to preserve staffing.
Some commentary focused directly on Bezos’s wealth and the optics of layoffs at a legacy institution controlled by one of the world’s richest people, while other voices argued the media business has structural problems that even deep pockets do not easily solve.
Bezos’s fortune has been closely watched for decades, built largely from Amazon’s stock performance and his continuing stake in the company.
That wealth, measured differently by different trackers, became a central reference point in public criticism as the Washington Post layoffs rolled out, with detractors framing it as a values test for ownership.
Inside the company, the reductions carried operational consequences beyond the immediate job losses, changing how desks coordinate, how stories move through editing and how the Post deploys resources at home and abroad.
Closing the books department removed a distinct coverage area and signaled a narrowing of priorities as managers tried to concentrate spending on what the spokesperson called “distinctive journalism.”
Shrinking overseas bureaus and reducing foreign coverage, staff members argued, risked weakening the Post’s ability to cover global events at a time of multiple international crises.
The newsroom reaction also reflected morale concerns that extend beyond any single outlet, as journalists in many organizations contend with repeated rounds of buyouts, hiring freezes, restructuring and layoffs.
The Post had already carried out prior cost cuts and buyouts, and the latest reductions added to a sense among employees that the institution’s footprint keeps contracting.
The Washington Post Guild planned a rally at noon Thursday outside Post offices in Washington, D.C., organizing around demands for accountability as the staff absorbs the latest round of cuts.
The episode also underscored how layoffs can ripple across occupations that do not fit the public’s image of a newsroom, including publishing software, business operations and technology roles that support subscriptions, advertising and content delivery.
For global mobility communities and workers tied to employment-based status, reductions in tech-adjacent divisions can be especially fraught, because job loss can collide with immigration timing, paperwork and career continuity.
Even when the headlines focus on foreign correspondents and editors, the same corporate decisions can land on engineers, product managers and other specialists whose work supports the wider business, including platforms like Arc XP.
Public reaction to the Washington Post layoffs turned repeatedly to leadership accountability and wealth disparity, with critics arguing that the burden of cost-cutting fell heavily on employees while Bezos’s net worth remained near the top of global rankings.
Others stressed that the media sector’s economics have shifted sharply, as advertising migrates to tech firms and audiences rely on platforms that can boost or throttle traffic with algorithm changes.
Within that environment, newsroom cuts can become both a symptom and a cause of decline, as fewer editors and reporters can mean fewer scoops, thinner coverage and weaker differentiation in a crowded digital market.
At the same time, the company’s leadership framed its decisions as necessary to concentrate resources and stabilize operations, aiming to preserve what it sees as the Post’s distinctive strengths.
The debate over the Washington Post layoffs, sharpened by Bezos’s role as owner, continued to play out in personal posts from journalists affected by the cuts and in broader arguments about what kind of coverage the public will lose.
“I was just laid off by The Washington Post in the middle of a warzone. I have no words. I’m devastated.”
Jeff Bezos Faces Criticism as Washington Post Announces Major Layoffs
The Washington Post has laid off roughly one-third of its staff, totaling over 300 employees, citing financial pressures and a $100 million loss. The cuts impacted local news, sports, and international bureaus, sparking intense criticism of owner Jeff Bezos. While leadership claims these actions sharpen the paper’s focus, staff and critics argue the move undermines democracy and ignores the owner’s vast personal wealth.
