« Not war. Just some violence | Main | Peaches, cream, and Down Syndrome »

July 31, 2007



The editorial board of the WSJ may stand of the generally good reputation of the news side of the wall, but they sure don't rely on the news guys for facts and data. In fact, the editorial/opinion side of the 'wall' often contradict or ignore the facts gathered by their own reporters.

The major bad thing to come out of this is probably a new Faux News Business cable channel riding on the reputation of the WSJ, but it's hard to see how this could be worse than Kudlow on CNBC. But even that may have some upside: less viewers for Faux News itself.

The major good thing is the possibility that within five years the WSJ reportage will reek of the Murdockian cant bad enough that a major corporations-are-always-the-solution voice will have been weakened.

Maybe some progressive big money-holders will hire away the best actual reporters and set up a more balanced news voice for that fraction of the business community that is more progressive - and there are some businesses and CEOs in that category (a major source of Dem. money support). That's low probability, but who knows?

The comments to this entry are closed.