- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
Does this mean the long held Liberal Agenda of the Wall Street Journal will be no more?
Actually, let's pause for a moment and ask a few questions.
Question 1) is Dow Jones, Inc. currently losing money?
Question 2) is the Wall Street Journal losing money for its parent company?
Question 3) if the answer to question 1 or 2 is yes, would altering the tone of the WSJ in anyway enhance its ability to earn money for its parent.
Rupert Murdoch is (as most billionaires who are honest are) a conservative. However that brand of conservatism is largely based on a "hands off my money" libertarian conservatism (yes I know that is a contradiction in terms)that is quite populist at its core.
Fox News, and Mr. Murdoch's papers are essentially tabloid fare, meant to inspire the rage and joy of it's great unwashed reader/viewership. The Wall Street Journal is a differnt animal entirely. It's readership isn't there for good feeling, it is there for honest accurate news to aid in their investing. If Mr. Murdoch opted to transform the WSJ into a Far Right USA Today, his sales would plummet, and nothing in Mr. Murdoch's history suggests he's the kind of business man to do such a thing.
What sells is what sells, as such you can and do have the ocasional comedic set up of Fox News deriding the moral depravity of Fox Television, but in the end it's what the customers demand.
I see nothing in Mr. Murdoch's agenda aside from simple averice. His remaking of American Media to look more like European Media is simply a business model. When it ceases to make money for the man he will either change his model or become bankrupt, either way the problem solves itself.
Would we be equally fearfull if Salon Media made an offer for the WSJ? Probably, but those leftist peacenicks are crazy!
