Talks Today Over Wall St. Journal Sale to Murdoch

By Jeralyn, Section Media
Posted on Mon Jun 04, 2007 at 01:51:00 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

The Bancroft family (chief stockholder in Dow Jones) is meeting with News Corp today to decide about editorial independence of the Wall St. Journal in the event of Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. take-over bid.

T-Rex comments here.

I don't get the big deal over the editorial content. The Wall St. Journal already has a right-wing editorial board. What's the difference between that and Murdoch?

I subscribe to the Journal at a cost of $100 plus a year because of their political and social reporting (not financial reporting as I have no interest in that arena.) I never read their editorials.

The Wall St. Journal's reporting is top-notch. They did great stuff on Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib and even on criminal justice and sentencing issues. That's what I'm afraid will be lost if Murdoch has his way.

Update: Commenters point out I misunderstand the nature of the takeover and how newspapers work. Editorial control includes control of the news. I stand corrected.

< The Snitch in the JFK Terror Case | Military Interrogator: "I Tortured People" >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Talks Today Over Wall St. Journal Sale to Murdoch | 6 comments (6 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

J (none / 0) (#1)
by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Jun 04, 2007 at 12:20:00 AM EST

The NEWS operations at the WSJ are NOT run by the Editorial Board.

Completely different things.

You are way way wrong in this diary.

If Murdoch Buys the WSJ, (none / 0) (#2)
by Jeralyn on Mon Jun 04, 2007 at 12:31:25 AM EST

doesn't he get the whole paper? Or is he just trying to buy the editorial part? I thought he wanted to buy the whole paper.


Can you explain it? (none / 0) (#3)
by Jeralyn on Mon Jun 04, 2007 at 12:35:16 AM EST

Is he doing a takeover of the paper (which includes the news reporting) or just the editorial pages. I thought it was for the whole paper, including the editorial board, which means nothing to me compared to their great reporting. I'm concerned they will bring on right wing reporters to fiddle with the decisions about what should be reported and the slant those stories should be given.

I really like the WSJ as is.


: As far as I'm aware... (none / 0) (#5)
by LarryE on Mon Jun 04, 2007 at 01:20:49 AM EST

...the term "editorial content" includes news and features as well as editorial and op-ed pages. It is, in short, anything published under the direction of an editor, while generally excluding advertising.
So having control of editorial content does mean having control of reporting.

: Gabe (none / 0) (#6)
by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Jun 04, 2007 at 07:24:38 AM EST

explains it well.

Editorial board (none / 0) (#4)
by Gabriel Malor on Mon Jun 04, 2007 at 01:17:53 AM EST

Jeralyn, this is just a little misunderstanding of what "editorial" means in this context. You saw that the Dow Jones folks wanted editorial independence and thought of the editorial board, that group of people who set the direction of the editorial pages.

But that's not what they meant in this case. They're actually asking about an editorial-oversight board. They want to preserve the independence of the paper's editors, not just the editorial page editors, but the news editors too. They want to make sure that Murdoch doesn't have all his own say about the editors because they choose which articles get published in which places, who gets what assignments, what gets cut for space, etc. The news editors have just as much an impact on the "tone" of a newspaper. That's what's got the Dow Jones folks concerned.

First, it's human nature to want to keep control over something if possible. Even if Murdoch's people and the Dow Jones people were clones, that'd be reason enough to want to keep editorial independence.

Second, your inability to tell the difference between the politics of the editorial pages of the Wall Street Journal and Rupert Murdoch explains quite a bit about the way you see the world. You should try harder to see the world as made up of individuals, rather than mythical, monolithic political positions.