Comments (15)

Aug 1, 2007

I find it funny that they claimed preserving journalistic integrity was the main reason for the long negotiation period, but at the end of the day it was all about who was going to pay the banker and lawyer fees.

Aug 1, 2007
gators:

I find it funny that they claimed preserving journalistic integrity was the main reason for the long negotiation period, but at the end of the day it was all about who was going to pay the banker and lawyer fees.

you reference a peripheral issue. the 40M of fees are a huge sum, and a sticking point for a trust dept of a bank. remember that alot of the family shares are held in a 'trust' and thus the trust department of a bank (very risk adverse typically) make it their job to avoid banker/lawyer fees whenever possible.

Aug 1, 2007
cackmenimble:
gators:

I find it funny that they claimed preserving journalistic integrity was the main reason for the long negotiation period, but at the end of the day it was all about who was going to pay the banker and lawyer fees.

you reference a peripheral issue. the 40M of fees are a huge sum, and a sticking point for a trust dept of a bank. remember that alot of the family shares are held in a 'trust' and thus the trust department of a bank (very risk adverse typically) make it their job to avoid banker/lawyer fees whenever possible.

Touche, shows that I am just a lowly aspiring monkey.

Aug 1, 2007

Aside from the financial part of the deal I think that over the years, the journal will become a highly commercialized, ad drenched mess. It will become cheap and highly circulated but will lose its current intellectual readers and obtain more average readers. Something else will emerge to counter it.

Aug 1, 2007

I really hope nothing changes with the WSJ as it is one of the few great papers left in the country, along with the NY Times. However, Murdoch gets his sticky fingers onto everything he touches, so I am sure his bottom-line agenda is going to seep in and ads will start being plastered everywhere.

Learn More

7,548 questions across 469 investment banks. The WSO Investment Banking Interview Prep Course has everything you'll ever need to start your career on Wall Street. Technical, Behavioral and Networking Courses + 2 Bonus Modules. Learn more.

Aug 1, 2007

I would like to echo the sentiments of laxn.

Murdoch will kill the WSJ. Or at least, dumb it down to market it to the LCD a la Fox News.

disclaimer: I am a conservative, but Fox "News" has the journalistic integrity and sensationalism of the National Inquirer.

Aug 1, 2007
johnp686:

I would like to echo the sentiments of laxn.

Murdoch will kill the WSJ. Or at least, dumb it down to market it to the LCD a la Fox News.

disclaimer: I am a conservative, but Fox "News" has the journalistic integrity and sensationalism of the National Inquirer.

As a fan and supporter of the Inquirer, I'm offended!
(okay...so i've never read the Inquirer, but still)

Aug 1, 2007

...wow, is everyone that pessimistic about it? I think it's actually a good thing. I think Murdoch recognizes that the journal's definitely a niche paper with an extremely loyal following, and would be foolish to transform it into an advertising, political vehicle. I don't think he'll change it that much.

Plus now that the journal's part of a larger company, we might see better quality of news, and how it's delivered, with more infrastructure supporting it. who knows.

Aug 1, 2007

good point

werdwerd:

...wow, is everyone that pessimistic about it? I think it's actually a good thing. I think Murdoch recognizes that the journal's definitely a niche paper with an extremely loyal following, and would be foolish to transform it into an advertising, political vehicle. I don't think he'll change it that much.

Plus now that the journal's part of a larger company, we might see better quality of news, and how it's delivered, with more infrastructure supporting it. who knows.

Aug 1, 2007

isnt this the same guy who owns the NY Post? which is the most retarded newspaper ever....

Aug 2, 2007
mack387:

isnt this the same guy who owns the NY Post? which is the most retarded newspaper ever....

I'm not a Post fan, but some of their columnists are far better than their counterparts at more respected publications. I used to run into Ralph Peters around the Pentagon when he was a colonel who was destined never to get a star because he was smarter and more outspoken than the Army wanted him to be.

He plays a bit to his audience now, but he's still better than anyone I can think of at the Times, especially when he's writing for the War College crowd instead of the Post readership.

Aug 2, 2007

NY Post is actually a great read.

Personally, I'm happy Murdoch got the Journal. The last thing we need is someone like Burkle or another dumbass scooping up a prized media property and turning into a mouthpiece for people with the same blatant ideologies as Janeane Garofolo, Michael Moore or Al Franken. The NY Times already serves that purpose.

News Corp's resources would enable Dow Jones to reach greater audiences, especially internationally. And werdwerd makes a gret point - Murdoch isn't stupid and he will neither destroy nor jeopardize the integrity the WSJ possesses.

Murdoch's victory is a great day for the future of the WSJ.

Aug 2, 2007

I just hope that Murdoch lets Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity have daily columns...

Aug 2, 2007

oh man. the WSJ is now a no spin zone. wooooooot

Aug 2, 2007
Comment