Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

The End of the Journal?

Felix Salmon thinks it's time to write off the Wall Street Journal as a hopelessly Murdoch-ized publication. Sad.

By Ezra Klein  |  September 24, 2009; 10:35 AM ET
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Republicans for Waste and Abuse in Medicare
Next: Like Rain on Your Wedding Day


You would be better off reading the Financial Times, anyway.

Posted by: constans | September 24, 2009 10:57 AM | Report abuse

He doesn't 'write off' the WSJ. He makes a well-argued case that the paper has become more 'tabloid' in both story placement and bold headlines that don't match the story. He concludes by saying "The WSJ’s journalism seems to be much less scathed than the headlines have been." Sure he isn't happy, but it doesn't sound as if he going to cancel his subscription.

Ironically he is complaining about Murdoch doing exactly what you just did - putting a misleading headline on a story. Are you sure he hasn't taken over the Post?

Posted by: MrDo64 | September 24, 2009 11:20 AM | Report abuse

The linked article says Murdoch-driven WSJ headlines and article placement betray agenda, but for now the articles themselves seem to remain objective. We'll see how long that lasts, but how clever that this two-line blog post in effect does the same thing!

Posted by: reggilbert | September 24, 2009 11:22 AM | Report abuse

Sad? What's so sad about it. Even before Murdoch, this publication has been the symbol and go to news source for the rich. I don't understand why everything they say was taken as gospel and why even in universities, professors in business schools strongly encouraged students to get a subscription to this rag (they did in my school).

Posted by: zwfwrestler | September 24, 2009 11:40 AM | Report abuse

What the WSJ used to sell was trust. If you read it there (except on the editorial page) you could be sure it would hold up. If you want a newspaper with headlines and reporting that you constantly have to vet for accuracy, you don't need to buy the WSJ.

What it does remind us is just how fragile brands can be.

Posted by: paul314 | September 24, 2009 1:23 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company