Skip to main content

View Diary: How Nice: Someone at The Economist takes down a racist bonehead (19 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Hard to see a real equivalence re Economist & WSJ (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lineatus, MichiganChet

    In addition to the more patrician tone of The Economist, and it's general willingness to report facts rather than talking points, the main difference I see is the ownership of WSJ by Rupert Murdoch.

    Historically, the WSJ editorial page has been pretty far right, while the stories were not so "foxy", shall we say. But since the Murdoch buyout, there are an increasing number of "foxy' news stories populating the pages of WSJ.

    This week, as I heard about the Beyonce-lipsyncing "scandal", I noticed that the initial "story" ran in Murdoch's NYPost. Then, as it began to lose steam (particularly after the original anonymous source recanted, and others defended lipsyncing at cold, outdoor events), yesterday the WSJ had a front page article about the ginned-up controversy. What in the holy name of fuck is the connection between the Beyonce story and the economy? Damned if I can see any connection other than running down a long-time ally of Obama and creating controversy re the inauguration.

    Sadly, I expect little more from the WSJ at this point. I certainly would expect The Economist to ignore Beyonce, unless it wrote a fuller article about her, where the controversy would be little more than a footnote.

    A winning campaign? You didn't build that...

    by SilentBrook on Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 12:34:27 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site