There doubtlessly is angst about Rupert Murdoch's bid to take over Dow Jones, the company which publishes the Wall Street Journal. Sadly, Rupert isn't know for independence for the editors of his newspapers [exhibit 1: all but one of the Sun King's newspapers worldwide, some 170-ish, supported the Iraq War] and dumbing down is much the flavour of the month. Witness Fox News - well, Fox something, for "news" it isn't.
Jack Shafer, writing in Slate, proffers 8 reasons why Rup shouldn't get his hands on the WSJ:
"The Wall Street Journal may not be a perfect newspaper, but its news pages consistently run counter to its economic interests—that is, if the paper can bruise or bloody a misbehaving or corrupt business with a well-reported story, it does. The same goes for advertisers.
The same can't be said for Rupert Murdoch, whose $5 billion offer for Dow Jones, which owns the Journal, seems unstoppable. I essayed on this topic yesterday and return today with another eight reasons Wall Street Journal readers can't trust Murdoch to operate our favorite business daily."
Jack Shafer, writing in Slate, proffers 8 reasons why Rup shouldn't get his hands on the WSJ:
"The Wall Street Journal may not be a perfect newspaper, but its news pages consistently run counter to its economic interests—that is, if the paper can bruise or bloody a misbehaving or corrupt business with a well-reported story, it does. The same goes for advertisers.
The same can't be said for Rupert Murdoch, whose $5 billion offer for Dow Jones, which owns the Journal, seems unstoppable. I essayed on this topic yesterday and return today with another eight reasons Wall Street Journal readers can't trust Murdoch to operate our favorite business daily."
Comments