Here's what Jeff Bezos says about Trump visiting Blue Origin the same day of the announcement that the WaPo would not make a presidential endorsement

The background is that, if accurate, the loss of subscribers is stunning:

NEWS: More than 200,000 subscribers have canceled their digital subscriptions to the Washington Post after the revelation that owner Jeff Bezos blocked an endorsement of VP Harris.
That's about 8 percent of WaPo's subscriber base - a staggering sum
MOREhttps://t.co/nCJhJrmlq0

— David Folkenflik (@davidfolkenflik) October 28, 2024

Far less dramatic than the WaPo number, but I’m told in the week since we reported that the LA Times would not endorse, over 7,000 LAT subscribers canceled and specifically cited editorial content as the reason. The total number of cancelations is significantly higher, I’m told.

— Max Tani (@maxwelltani) October 28, 2024

Presumably because the type of people who pay for a LA Times or Washington Post subscription need to know which of these worlds the paper has decided to exist in:

Really, it's amazing. It's like there's an impermeable wall between them. pic.twitter.com/DeWAqNTBtR

— Orin Kerr (@OrinKerr) October 28, 2024

Here is the part of Bezos's new statement that stood out to me:

By itself, declining to endorse presidential candidates is not enough to move us very far up the trust scale, but it’s a meaningful step in the right direction. I wish we had made the change earlier than we did, in a moment further from the election and the emotions around it. That was inadequate planning, and not some intentional strategy.

I would also like to be clear that no quid pro quo of any kind is at work here. Neither campaign nor candidate was consulted or informed at any level or in any way about this decision. It was made entirely internally. Dave Limp, the chief executive of one of my companies, Blue Origin, met with former president Donald Trump on the day of our announcement. I sighed when I found out, because I knew it would provide ammunition to those who would like to frame this as anything other than a principled decision. But the fact is, I didn’t know about the meeting beforehand. Even Limp didn’t know about it in advance; the meeting was scheduled quickly that morning. There is no connection between it and our decision on presidential endorsements, and any suggestion otherwise is false.

No details are provided as to the nature of that meeting (let alone explain why keeping the nature of that meeting secret is helpful for improving society's trust in the Washington Post).