Murdoch, Journalism, and the Wall Street Journal

It's obvious by now that not only does Rupert Murdoch have no affirmative interest in journalism, he's actually opposed to it, right?

Almost two years ago, shortly after Murdoch bought it, I published a diary pointing out how Murdoch's ownership had corrupted the news side of the Journal, bringing a newspaper formerly acclaimed for the quality of its reporting down to the status of a house organ.

Yesterday Joe Nocera has a column in the Times making the same point.

In her book, “War at The Wall Street Journal,” Sarah Ellison recounts how editors inserted the phrase “assault on business” in an article about corporate taxes under President Obama. The Journal was turned into a propaganda vehicle for its owner’s conservative views. That’s half the definition of Fox-ification.

One of the reasons we in the blogosphere do what we do is dissatisfaction with the mainstream sources of information. Even for someone who, like me, has never been a reader of the Wall Street Journal, the debasement of any publication of genuine quality is very bad news.

The Wall Street Journal: Lying in the Service of the Ruling Class

There are certain institutions in the American press that can always be counted on, and the Wall Street Journal is one of them. Here's the latest example of their overheated rhetoric.

Having lost their fight in the legislature, Wisconsin unions are now getting out the steel pipes for those who don't step lively to their cause.

What's the action the workers are requesting?

A sign that says the business supports workers' rights.

And those steel pipes?

"With that we'd ask that you reconsider taking a sign and stance to support public employees in this community. Failure to do so will leave us no choice but do [sic] a public boycott of your business."

Yup, count on the Wall Street Journal.