newcritics

On August 1, 2007, a one of the greatest runs in journalism came to an end when the family owners of The Wall Street Journal sold the company to Rupert Murdoch.

Newcritics readers don’t need a review of Murdoch’s vile track record—if you read or listen to modern media, you feel his clammy touch.

This brief post is instead a eulogy to an outstanding newspaper and its reporters, who exemplified the best of a free press.

People who didn’t read the Journal often assumed it was a mouthpiece of corporate America. Far from it. With hands-off owners, the news section was run by professional journalists. The Journal was a paper—the paper—you had to read if you wanted to know who pulls the strings in business and politics. “Follow the money,” is well-worn advice to those in search of truth in our complex, sordid world. That’s what the Journal did for us. It followed the money trails, connected the dots, and explained who was profiting and how.

The Journal’s aggressive pursuit of the truth behind corporate spin began, ironically, in the Reagan era, when buyout kings like Henry Kravis and Michael Milken were running wild. The Journal gave us outstanding coverage of Iran /Contra, the S&L scandals, and perennially obscene CEO pay schemes. Since then, the Journal has dissected organizations like the Carlyle Group and other private money cartels that continue to buy up companies and throw workers in the street for the sake of enriching themselves beyond reason.

The Journal in its heyday was famous for long, in-depth stories (Murdoch says he intends to cut them), its willingness to let reporters pursue offbeat interests (Murdoch says he doesn’t see the purpose), and most of all, its dedication to excellent writing and editing.

Today the New York Times reported that the Journal’s reporters are moving uptown to join their Fox News counterparts in the News Corporation building. I have noticed the Journal stories are getting shorter—much shorter. I haven’t seen any obvious Murdoch agendas yet, but now I have to read each story with suspicion. This story in Slate touches on questionable Journal coverage of Pakistan, and invites readers to begin a Murdochification watch. I can’t participate—it’s too depressing. I think I’ll let my subscription lapse and try the Financial Times.

Tom Watson asked for a media moment that touched us in 2007. I am afraid that this media moment is going to touch, and keep touching, all of us.