Tag Archives: Wall Street Journal

Anybody told the WSJ yet that the head of Scotland Yard just resiged?

So the WSJ editorial page was/is/always will be conservative. They embraced neoconservativism. They loved them some wars. They embraced ‘trickle down’ and ‘supply side’ economics, and they embraced some of the wackiest Republican office seekers in a century.

But they were still part of a great paper, full of real journalists who have to read this today.

News and Its Critics
A tabloid’s excesses don’t tarnish thousands of other journalists.
When News Corp. and CEO Rupert Murdoch secured enough shares to buy Dow Jones & Co. four years ago, these columns welcomed our new owner and promised to stand by the same standards and principles we always had. That promise is worth repeating now that politicians and our competitors are using the phone-hacking years ago at a British corner of News Corp. to assail the Journal, and perhaps injure press freedom in general.

That is a deeply political statement. This is pretty good too:

The British politicians now bemoaning media influence over politics are also the same statesmen who have long coveted media support. The idea that the BBC and the Guardian newspaper aren’t attempting to influence public affairs, and don’t skew their coverage to do so, can’t stand a day’s scrutiny.

I wouldn’t be surprised to see more resignations from the news side soon, something that in any case has been happening for three and a half years. Back in April, when Reuters announced some new top editorial appointments, many of them were former WSJ reporters.  At the time, Media Matters wrote:

It’s the latest chapter in the steady loss of talent from Dow Jones and The Wall Street Journal since Rupert Murdoch took over. And many of the departed personnel are helping to boost the efforts of Dow Jones’ biggest rivals — Reuters, Bloomberg, and The New York Times.

Even before Murdoch’s News Corp. finalized the purchase of Dow Jones in late 2007, concerns arose in and out of the news operation . . . strategy could slant coverage or, at least, hurt quality.

In interviews with Media Matters, many of the dozens to flee the Journal and Dow Jones in the past three and half years say the push for shorter stories, less investigative work, and — at times — a subtle nudge for more business-friendly stories has made it a worse place to work and resulted in a diminished editorial product.

That’s destruction, turning a national treasure into just another ‘product’.  But it’s what Daddy wanted.

Fox Still Misrepresenting NLRB’s Case Against Boeing


From Media Matters:

Fox News has repeatedly suggested that the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is engaging in unlawful or “anti-American” activity by filing a complaint against Boeing for deciding to build a new plant in the “right to work” state of South Carolina. But the NLRB complaint alleges that Boeing moved to South Carolina in retaliation for union workers’ decision to strike, and experts say that allegations in the case represent an “absolutely standard violation” of federal labor law.

The article also points to falsehoods about the story in another Rupert Murdoch propaganda mill, the Wall Street Journal.

Because we need to hear more from him

In just 16 months they’ve added more than $2 trillion to the national debt . . . Had President Obama campaigned on this agenda, he wouldn’t have garnered 30% of the popular vote.

Our greatest mind, Mr. Rush Limbaugh, has a word or two to say in The Wall Street Journal today. The headline alone – “Liberals and the violence card” is accusatory – which of course is Limbaugh’s permanent tone. Be outraged, accuse someone (else) of being the cause, define them as ‘the enemy’, ‘the other’. It’s an old old song.

Not quite daily . . .

In his op-ed, he honors today’s Tea Party and says one of  the reasons for their  protests is what Obama has done to the debt. Rush has perhaps not noticed what happened between October ’08 and January ’09?

Obama was inaugurated as President of a very different country than he campaigned in. On October 14, 2008, Bush and Paulson announced the economy was on the verge of collapse and created the Troubled Asset relief Program for $700 billion.

The economy didn’t collapse. It did however crash. And the ongoing impact on our national debt spilled immediately into the Obama administration. Whether the actions of either administration were right or wrong for the country is something we don’t know yet.

It seems we need to remind Mr. Bouncy Bouncy of that little matter. We became a different country 21 days before Obama won the election.

He wraps it up with:

A clear majority of the American people want no part of this. They instinctively know that the Obama way is not how things get done in this country. They are motivated by love. Not hate, not sedition. They love their country and want to save it from those who do not.

Which is, I guess, why the American people elected Obama and the Democrats. Silly Americans.