Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: PittsburghAfterDark
Meanwhile the Wall Street Journal grows. Now, just how can that be? How can the one conservative leaning newspaper grow while the rest of the communist leaning newspapers....

I would argue that there is a great perception that the WSJ is conservative. Now that perception may likely be the reason is continues to perfom above everyone else, but the honest fact is that the WSJ is crazy liberal and I would further argue that it has become even more liberal in the past few years.

The editorials are solid and conservative, but most of the news and features are written from a decidedly liberal point of view.

This is the same paper that ran panting pro-Obama story and photo on its front page, nearly single every day, for months before the election. At the same time, they ran consistently ran unflattering McCain stories, when they covered him.

11 posted on 10/26/2009 7:55:30 AM PDT by Obadiah (Obama: Chains you can believe in!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Obadiah

I will grant you that some of their reporters are lefties and write articles with that bias - I could even name a few off the top of my head - but overall, the paper is delightfully rightish, even in their cultural coverage - and can be even more delightful in not having any slant entering into the writing at all. Yes, the fashion chick is ga-ga over Michelle but most of the rest is pretty even handed - and in this day and age, it’s refreshing...and sells papers...


14 posted on 10/26/2009 8:02:51 AM PDT by matginzac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: Obadiah

“they ... consistently ran unflattering McCain stories”

I can’t explain the obama part, but McCain is an idiot and deserved to lose. The bad press was probably because McCain didn’t want to win and everyone could see it.


21 posted on 10/26/2009 8:28:12 AM PDT by bassfishing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: Obadiah

>>>a great perception that the WSJ is conservative.

I agree that WSJ has continued its slide to the left. Although it seems to have accelerated over the last several years, it has been going on for decades. Printing in color marked one of its water sheds. At one time, only the front middle column contained a liberal human interest story.

Unfortunately, the same has happened to Barron’s, their sister publication, but only more so.

In both publications, it has become difficult to find an article that’s so interesting you are forced to buy it.

I find it difficult to believe that all these publications can’t figure out what sells. Look at the success of conservative talk radio and conservative web sites. All medias made a hard left when journalism schools started preaching that news had to carry the author’s opinion. Decades ago, news had to reflect TRUTH instead.


29 posted on 10/26/2009 9:07:30 AM PDT by Hop A Long Cassidy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: Obadiah

>>I would argue that there is a great perception that the WSJ is conservative. Now that perception may likely be the reason is continues to perfom above everyone else, but the honest fact is that the WSJ is crazy liberal and I would further argue that it has become even more liberal in the past few years.

The editorials are solid and conservative, but most of the news and features are written from a decidedly liberal point of view.<<

You’re correct, and you’ve been proven correct by testing. The test, as I recall, consisted of ranking news stories based upon whether they cited sources that could be construed as liberal, neutral or conservative. Surprisingly (to me anyway) the WSJ had by far the most liberal news story bias than any other major newspaper, the NY Times included.

Of course the editorial pages offset that bias, but it’s still good to keep in mind that the news pages reflect a quite liberal bias though it’s often subtle. Again, it depends on what they choose to cover and who they choose to rely upon as sources. The ACORN story, for instance, was muted in the WSJ until several days after it erupted. Similarly, you would never know that the global warming/climate change topic was still being debated if you only relied upon their news pages. Sure, they’ll print the economic winners vs. losers stories, but not the arguments in rebuttal of the entire concept. They’re too liberal to do so.

Frankly, to get a conservative slant on U.S. news, one has to go to Canadian and British papers on-line. And possibly Investor’s Business Daily, which I don’t see much.

If you’re going to be reading news with a liberal slant (and you are), better it be from a paper where the editorial staff will do its best to straighten out the confusion at the end of the day. Also, it’s not all bad to keep an eye on the opposition’s thinking, and reading the news pages of the WSJ will accomplish that to a greater extent than one realizes. Best to realize it, then continue reading.


30 posted on 10/26/2009 9:31:01 AM PDT by Norseman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson