The Washington Post is still publishing, but it’s going through one of the most dramatic crises in its modern history, centered on massive cuts, strategic confusion, and backlash from readers and staff.

What happened to The Washington Post?

1. The big picture

  • In early February 2026, The Washington Post laid off about one‑third of its staff, including hundreds of journalists and other employees.
  • Management is calling this a “strategic reset,” saying the goal is to make the paper leaner and more competitive in a crowded digital news market.
  • Many journalists and media observers, however, see it as a severe blow to one of the most storied newsrooms in the United States.

2. What exactly was cut?

Key parts of the newsroom were gutted or shut down outright.

  • The entire sports section was eliminated as a standalone desk.
  • Several foreign bureaus were closed or sharply reduced, including bureaus covering conflict zones like the Middle East and Ukraine.
  • The books desk and dedicated books coverage were discontinued.
  • The flagship daily news podcast “Post Reports” was halted.
  • Local and international coverage were restructured and shrunk, with fewer reporters and a tighter focus on national security and select beats.

An illustration of how deep it went: some bureau chiefs abroad publicly shared that they had been laid off and that many colleagues were also out.

3. Why did this happen?

Official explanation

  • The current editor, Matt Murray, told staff the cuts were needed to secure the Post’s future and better reach audiences in a saturated media environment.
  • Leadership framed it as a business necessity : revenue pressures, subscription plateaus or declines, and the need to get back to profitability.

Deeper context and tensions

  • Under owner Jeff Bezos, the paper has chased digital growth, experimented with engagement features, and tried new models to keep readers on its own platforms.
  • One widely criticized experiment would let people mentioned in stories add comments directly on the Post’s site, raising fears about blurring the line between verified reporting and spin.
  • The paper has also faced subscriber backlash , including a wave of cancellations after controversial decisions around political coverage and endorsements.

4. How are people reacting?

Inside the newsroom

  • Current and former leaders describe the day of the layoffs as one of the darkest moments in the Post’s history.
  • Staff members have called the cuts a “bloodbath” and expressed shock at how much institutional knowledge and reporting capacity vanished overnight.
  • There was already a sense of burnout and instability after a year or more of turmoil in leadership, strategy, and editorial direction.

Outside observers and forums

  • Journalists and media critics argue that slashing sports, books, and international coverage undercuts what made the Post distinctive.
  • On forums and local discussion boards, some users blame Bezos personally, saying he “destroyed” or intentionally hollowed out a historic newsroom, while others think it’s a desperate and clumsy attempt to pivot the brand.
  • A recurring sentiment: the paper seems trapped in an identity crisis , unsure whether it is a traditional serious newspaper, a digital engagement machine, or something in between.

“Things are somehow getting worse for the Washington Post” is a common theme in forum threads discussing the last couple of years.

5. Where does this leave the Post now?

  • The Washington Post still operates as a major national outlet, but with a much smaller newsroom and a narrower scope of coverage.
  • It is trying to refocus on selected areas—especially politics, national security, and core national stories—while sacrificing some of the breadth (sports, books, wide‑ranging foreign bureaus) that longtime readers valued.
  • The big open question people are debating is whether this “strategic reset” will stabilize the Post’s business or simply accelerate a loss of influence, talent, and trust.

TL;DR:
When people ask “what happened to The Washington Post,” they’re usually referring to the February 2026 decision to cut about a third of its staff, shut its sports section and some foreign bureaus, and kill key coverage areas—moves framed by leadership as a necessary reset but widely seen as a historic and possibly self‑destructive downsizing of a once‑dominant newsroom.

Information gathered from public forums or data available on the internet and portrayed here.