Posted on 07/14/2006 4:43:53 AM PDT by abb
Dow Jones yesterday offered a clue to the possible next editorial overseer of The Wall Street Journal, its flagship publication, as the company twinned an announcement of the retirement date of the newspaper’s managing editor with the creation of a committee to reassess the ways it delivers news across all its print and online properties.
Paul E. Steiger, The Journal’s managing editor since 1991, will step down at the end of 2007, the year he turns 65, in accordance with the company’s retirement policies. Meanwhile, Paul Ingrassia, president of Dow Jones Newswires, will lead the companywide project as part of his new responsibilities as vice president of news strategy for Dow Jones.
The company said that no successor to Mr. Steiger had been chosen, and would not be named until next spring. But Mr. Ingrassia will play a significant role in determining the journalistic future of The Journal, as the company said he would be given a senior editorial position once the news strategy project was completed early next year.
The announcements come at a time when Dow Jones, like all publishing companies, faces fundamental challenges that go beyond the cyclical gyrations of the advertising market. Online media are spiriting away readers and usurping some of the advertising dollars that used to flow to newspapers. While many publishers have built some of the most popular news Web sites, the ad rates they can charge for their online publications do not come close to matching the ones they receive for their print products.
Dow Jones is one of the rare publishers that have managed to create a successful Web site that requires users to pay a subscription fee, but it is confronting further troubles particular to its publications.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Pinging the Dinosaur Media DeathWatch™ List with a new Keeper of a graphic we need to steal...
Is that one a keeper or what, lol?
"the journalistic future of The Journal "
The dail WSJ paper edition is great as well as their subscriber website. Hate to see changes in either, other than perhaps a price break for long term subscribers;)
Anyone know about the "smaller format journal"?
What was wrong with the old format?
The Journal's arguably the best paper in the US, and doesn't rely much on classified ads, so I wouldn't be quick to lump it with its fellow papers as dinosaurs.
This is especially true considering the successful online operation, which eliminates (very high) distribution costs and still has something like 750k subscribers.
The idea of reducing reporting on "commodity news" and increasing investigative reporting and other things that make the Journal special seems good to me.
D
In the interests of full disclosure, I own stock in Dow Jones. A very poor investment choice, as it has turned out...
abb, please put me on that ping list...
Always the best news of the day.
If they are serious and want people to come back to the WSJ, they will fire every liberal hack, who was hired and trained by Al Hunt.
The so called news side of the WSK was labelled more liberal than the NY Slimes by a UCLA study/report last year.
There are a lot of people like Miss Marple and I who cancelled our subscriptions because the vitrol that Al Hunt had once a week. Then, we found out that he was instrumental in the hiring selection of so called reporters and set up the polls for the left side of the WSJ.
Once, long ago, I actually CALLED a WSJ reporter about a story. This was back in the late 80's. I didn't know about the division in the paper at that time and so I was totally taken aback by his liberal, condescending attitude. Then I found out about Al Hunt some years later, and all became clear. That is when I cancelled.
The editorial page editor should take over the news division, or the editoroial staff should start up their own paper and then we would see how the WSJ would fare. Most people subscribe to it for business news and the editorial page. Without that editorial page, I bet people would go elsewhere. I know that I decided to.
They should split the WSJ into two newspapers.
One would be as you suggested and the other would be the left wing liberal news posing as so called business news.
I would immediately subscribe to your suggestion if it was available on the internet.
The other brand would probably be broke in a year or so.
All newspapers are dinosaurs - "yesterday's news today". And they ruin the environment, killing trees, wasting energy to produce paper, run the presses, fuel for delivery trucks, and in the end, just plain trash filling landfills. All this for lies, distortions, fabrications, sensationalism, propaganda, and treason.
Very Funny
Thanks for the ping abb.
That's a scary thought, OK... we better make sure the RATS never get enough of a majority to make it come true!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.