+- MacResource (https://forums.macresource.com)
+-- Forum: My Category (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: 'Friendly' Political Ranting (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Thread: Has the Wall Street Journal always been this bad?? (/showthread.php?tid=87338)
Pages:
1
2
Has the Wall Street Journal always been this bad?? - mattkime - 11-06-2009
I know that the WSJ leans conservative but this looks worthy of the worst political pundits.
WSJ wrote:
Valerie Jarrett, senior adviser to President Barack Obama, recently explained the White House war on Fox News as an example of "speaking truth to power." Much of the American political world collapsed in laughter, pointing out that her boss was president of the United States, the most powerful man on earth. His every word is news around the world. Fox News is a cable channel rarely watched by more than a few million people at a time. How could she have so blithely said something completely out-of-sync with reality?
Simple: She's a liberal.
Now, Valerie Jarrett clearly said something stupid but its not because she's a liberal.
(and yes, i realize that WSJ political bias was discussed recently, i'm curious how this nugget relates to that conversation)
Re: Has the Wall Street Journal always been this bad?? - Gutenberg - 11-06-2009
Rupert Murdoch. Check any paper the man has ever bought and it has become more opinionated, more to the right and coarser than it was before he bought it. I am wondering what Page Six will look like in the WSJ soon.
Re: Has the Wall Street Journal always been this bad?? - OWC Jamie - 11-06-2009
Only a mouth breathing neocon would say something that stupid.
Re: Has the Wall Street Journal always been this bad?? - robfilms - 11-06-2009
mattkime-
i thoroughly agree with your posting.
i brought this topic up last week.
http://forums.macresource.com/read.php?2,824008,824734#msg-824734
i'm really surprised that the obvious change in the tone of the wall street journal has not raised more concern. the journal was once a very good newspaper, now it just seems cranky.
what a shame.
ymmv
be well
rob
Re: Has the Wall Street Journal always been this bad?? - Don Kiyoti - 11-06-2009
It's a shame what's happening to the WSJ.
Of course those on the right will be just fine with the decline in quality because it's sliding in their direction.
Re: Has the Wall Street Journal always been this bad?? - cbelt3 - 11-06-2009
Don Kiyoti wrote:
It's a shame what's happening to the WSJ.
Of course those on the right will be just fine with the decline in quality because it's sliding in their direction.
I'm not. Then again, I consider myself a Conservationist conservative, not one of these 'neo cons' or 'born again conservatives'.
The WSJ "USED" to be an excellent source of business news. As soon as they started dipping into the NY Times business, they lost their focus. Hence Barron's improvement in the financial news markets. Now that Rupie has them dipping into the New York Post's business, they've lost whatever focus they had left.
I don't think that "Wall Street" thinks the way the Wall Street Journal does. I don't think the American Public should, either.
Re: Has the Wall Street Journal always been this bad?? - SteveO - 11-06-2009
Nope, didn't used to be like this. They always leaned right in editorials, but not on such a childish level as this. I subscribed for a couple years and greatly enjoyed it in the mid-late '90s. The stories were always interesting, thorough and varied. Back then. What a shame.
Re: Has the Wall Street Journal always been this bad?? - $tevie - 11-06-2009
Gutenberg wrote:
Rupert Murdoch. Check any paper the man has ever bought and it has become more opinionated, more to the right and coarser than it was before he bought it. I am wondering what Page Six will look like in the WSJ soon.
Seacrest had a great line on that very idea:
http://forums.macresource.com/read.php?2,824008,824657#msg-824657
Re: Has the Wall Street Journal always been this bad?? - Gutenberg - 11-06-2009
Oh, man. That is good. Seacrest wins!
Re: Has the Wall Street Journal always been this bad?? - Don Kiyoti - 11-06-2009
cbelt3 wrote:
[quote=Don Kiyoti]
It's a shame what's happening to the WSJ.
Of course those on the right will be just fine with the decline in quality because it's sliding in their direction.
I'm not. Then again, I consider myself a Conservationist conservative, not one of these 'neo cons' or 'born again conservatives'.
The WSJ "USED" to be an excellent source of business news. As soon as they started dipping into the NY Times business, they lost their focus. Hence Barron's improvement in the financial news markets. Now that Rupie has them dipping into the New York Post's business, they've lost whatever focus they had left.
I don't think that "Wall Street" thinks the way the Wall Street Journal does. I don't think the American Public should, either.
cbelt, I don't picture you as that far to the right. Like you say, you're no neocon.
The ones who'll applaud the blurring of WSJ's conservative editorial stance with its reporting, and dumbing down, are the ones who think everything published in the NY Times and Washington post is a left-wing lie.