Posted on 08/14/2007 7:45:26 PM PDT by LdSentinal
It's Forward Into Battle!" That's how Newsweek describes the impending battle between the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal, once Rupert Murdoch is legally owner of the financial daily.
There are all sorts of predictions about what will happen, particularly how Murdoch might change the Wall Street Journal, And what the New York Times will do to meet the challenge. Newsweek, at least, predicts “all-out war”.
Others don't go quite so far, but there is agreement that Murdoch has lots of ideas for the Wall Street Journal once he takes over.
If he accomplishes them all, he will create, with the help of soon-to-be-launched Fox Business Network, a journalistic juggernaut whose influence, will range far beyond the world of financial news and information.
“Murdoch thinks The Times is vulnerable,” a long-time senior executive confided to the Los Angles Times.
Murdoch has already signaled he will beef up editorial coverage in the Wall Street Journal, adding perhaps at least four more pages, hiring more staff in Europe and expanding the Journal's coverage of global financial news.
Like many other American newspapers, the New York Times has lately been tightening its belt. Only last week it trimmed its page size in an effort to save newsprint, and money. In recent years it has closed many of its foreign bureaux.
But the biggest changes that Murdoch is expected to make are not in the newsroom. One possibility is that he will make all or most of the Journal's website free. It means giving up nearly a million subscriptions at $79 (£39) a year, but would prove that Murdoch prizes readership - and the increased advertising revenue that the larger audience of a free web site would attract.
Ken Chandler, who worked for Murdoch for almost 30 years at the New York Post and Boston Herald, told the Los Angeles Times that he things one of Murdoch's first first moves could be to cut the news-stand and subscription prices.
Some analysts believe the Times will have a big battle on its hands. The feeling is that the Sulzberger family, which largely owns the New York Times Company, may in the not too distant future, face the same problems - particularly unhappy shareholders - that led the Bancroft Family to finally give in and accept Rupert Murdoch's offer for the Dow Jones flagship and its ancillary publications.
Those additional publications include 22 local newspapers, there are already reports that Murdoch is planning to put them up for sale as soon as the Wall Street Journal takeover is finalized. The expected asking price? Around $660 million.
Bump
Go get them Murdoch. Grind them into the ground! I’m rooting for you!
... that led the Bancroft Family to finally give in and accept Rupert Murdoch's offer for the Dow Jones flagship and its ancillary publications.Those additional publications include 22 local newspapers, there are already reports that Murdoch is planning to put them up for sale as soon as the Wall Street Journal takeover is finalized. The expected asking price? Around $660 million.
...mmmm...what to do, what to do? My WSJ subscription is up at the end of the month. Do I renew at current rates, or let it lapse and join up again later?
While the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal is conservative, the newspaper's news pages are liberal, even more liberal than The New York Times. The Drudge Report may have a right-wing reputation, but it leans left. Coverage by public television and radio is conservative compared to the rest of the mainstream media. Meanwhile, almost all major media outlets tilt to the left.These are just a few of the surprising findings from a UCLA-led study, which is believed to be the first successful attempt at objectively quantifying bias in a range of media outlets and ranking them accordingly.
snip
Of the 20 major media outlets studied, 18 scored left of center, with CBS' "Evening News," The New York Times and the Los Angeles Times ranking second, third and fourth most liberal behind the news pages of The Wall Street Journal.
I hope we see Mark Steyn in the editorials/commentary pages.
Well, Murdoch hasn’t yet taken over the WSJ and cleansed the liberal vermin.
Gee - with confidential sources and news flashes like that - it's a wonder the LA Times is not the nations leader in circulation. That statement doesnt require a long-time senior executive, just somebody who is observant with current events.
What will the Slimes to do compete? Maybe make up some news stories that are false but sensational?
Run stories critical of Bush?
Oh... you mean they've done that already?
First off they have to splash across their front page as bold headlines any secret plan they might have. Then they need to write an editorial describing the life and times of any secret operative the Times might have working with Murdock. Then they need to give a heads up to the world on any stories they might be contemplating for the next 10 years so nothing is a surprise. Then they need to creat fictional polls on who the public has more trust in. Then they need to draft a pathetic victim of the battle and create a 10 part daily pull out section with details and specifics.
Oh wait, thats only what they do for state secrets during war time.
Sorry, Never mind. :-|
>> Well, Murdoch hasn’t yet taken over the WSJ and cleansed the liberal vermin.
I’m not sure Murdoch thinks of liberals as vermin.
In fact, I’ll bet that he himself is liberal.
But, first and foremost, he’s a *businessman*. He sees the huge underserved market for balanced-to-conservative news and opinion, and he aims to fill it and make money.
He will gladly put his own personal views aside to make a buck.
Just my 2c
I will derive a huge amount of pleasure from watching him mop the floor with Pinch and the NYT.
Trust no studies that come out of the liberal cesspool that is UCLA. Folks on staff there lean so far left they have to be tied upright in chairs in order to look like they’re sitting up straight.
Murdoch probably shares the mindset of past and present media barons who staunchly support the notion of their own private property while treating everything else as negotiable.
Sounds a lot like Gail Wynand in 'The Fountainhead', doesn't it.
“.. what the New York Times will do to meet the challenge. “ Why they will go further to the LEFT, of course!
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.