For the past several election cycles, major media outlets and newspapers have confirmed their liberal-leaning bias every four years with reliable endorsements of the Democratic presidential nominee, whoever it happened to be, against their Republican opponent.

The trend appears to have ended this year, as Gannett and its USA Today network, a major media conglomerate that owns hundreds of publications across the nation, have decided not to endorse either of the presidential candidates, the Washington Examiner reported.

That is a huge blow for Democratic nominee Vice President Kamala Harris, and comes just days after both The Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times similarly declined to endorse the Democrat as those newspapers have routinely done for decades.

USA Today Network publications will not endorse VP Harris

The Hill reported on Monday that USA Today and its parent company Gannett, which owns more than 200 small to large U.S. media outlets and publications at the state and local level around the country, announced that they will not be issuing any presidential endorsements in this election cycle.

"None of the USA TODAY Network publications are endorsing in presidential or national races," spokeswoman Lark-Marie Anton said in a statement on Monday to announce the decision.

In a follow-up statement on Wednesday to clarify any possible confusion, Anton said, "While USA TODAY will not endorse for president, local editors at publications across the USA TODAY Network have the discretion to endorse at a state or local level."

"Many have decided not to endorse individual candidates, but rather, endorse key local and state issues on the ballot that impact the community," she continued. "Why are we doing this? Because we believe America’s future is decided locally -- one race at a time."

Anton added, "And with more than 200 publications across the nation, our public service is to provide readers with the facts that matter and the trusted information they need to make informed decisions."

Harris disappointed that Washington Post and L.A. Times declined to endorse

The Examiner noted that USA Today's refusal to endorse VP Harris follows similar non-endorsement decisions days earlier by The Washington Post and the L.A. Times, despite all three of those legacy media outlets having a long tradition of backing Democratic candidates in presidential elections.

Those decisions sparked intense controversy and pushback from both within and outside of the publications, as some columnists and editorial board members have publicly criticized the move or even resigned in protest, and hundreds of thousands of readers have reportedly canceled their subscriptions.

On Tuesday, according to Fox News, VP Harris called in for an interview on "The Breakfast Club" morning radio show in New York City and was asked by host Charlemagne the God for her thoughts on major publications like the Post and the Times deciding not to endorse her in this election cycle, and rather predictably Harris managed to blame those decisions on her opponent, former President Donald Trump.

The non-endorsements were "disappointing, no doubt," Harris said, but asserted that they were decisions made solely by "billionaires in Donald Trump's club" who hoped to appease the Republican nominee and benefit from his policies in a prospective second term.

Billionaire owners cite perception of bias to defend non-endorsement decisions

Fox News noted that VP Harris was referring to the billionaires who own The Washington Post and the L.A. Times -- Amazon's Jeff Bezos and pharmaceutical inventor and investor Patrick Soon-Shiong, respectively -- who have both defended their decisions to not allow their publications to make a presidential endorsement.

Both explained separately that, in their view, such endorsements have little impact on convincing people how to vote but instead invite blowback against the publications by reinforcing the public perception that they are politically biased and not trustworthy.