Wall Street Journal

[Jon Miller]

So I got the Wall Street Journal today (in my room at the hotel).

I looked at the early pages, and they seemed to be very probusiness.. then I turned to the opnion pages and the Wall Street Journal's editor stuff was the most party biased (in favor of Republicans) that I have ever seen in a 'normal' newspaper.

Reading it, you would think that by giving democrats control of congress we would go hard socialist.

This is suppose to be a well read and well respected information peice in the business community.. are they really so far in the Republican's camp?

Additionally, reading this you get the picture that the Republicans are very very very good for big business. If there is only so much of representation that a party can do, and the Republicans are representing Big Business so well, what about the rest of us?

Now I wish we would go hard socialist. But there are a lot of Big Business fans (Those who wish they were part of Wealth) who read this and think that democrats are anti-capitalism. Which they aren't (unfortunately)..

Big Business is so blind, corruption of government/etc will end up hurting them too, as the ability of the common man to buy goods decreases (which would have happened already except for our insane ability to borrow money to pay for all our desires).

JM

[DAVOUT]

Big business is a part of the US but not all. I recently red "Making globalization work" writen by the American Nobel prize of economy J.E.Stiglitz. It will give you reasons for hope.

[Pekka]

Well we'd need to read that article to decide if it's biased or not.

But it might be if it takes a political turn, then again it was the editors stuff and opinion page.

[Dauphin]

There's nothing wrong with bias, as long as the paper makes no attempt to hide it by misleading statement or otherwise making out that they aren't biased.

I'm not sure if its a law here, or just a best practice, but I've seen a few papers make disclosures (within articles) about their owners relations to people or organisations mentioned in the (said) articles they write. Certainly in the business sections.

[DinoDoc]

The news section of the paper isn't really biased, IMO. The editorial section of the paper on the other hand does have a Pro-GOP bent to it but I don't think they really try to hide that. Anyway are you really suprised that you being a commie and all would percieve a pro-business bent in a paper named the Wall Street Journal?

[chequita guevara]

The editorial section seems to be this little partisan publication that gets stuck in the paper. They don't have much to do with the rest f the paper, and its not even clear they even read the rest of the paper, for example, calling for the imprisonment of the NYT editors for publishing the money watching of the Feds and saying they'd never do anything like that, when in fact the WSJ had been investigating it for a year and published its own accounts only hours after the NYT.

[Jon Miller]

Hmm

OK, so I was just wrong expecting the editorial to be as good as the Washington Post (which while slightly left leaning, is still fair..)

JM

[chequita guevara]

The WSJ is owned by the Dow Jones corporation, and the head of the company is apparently very right wing.

[Jon Miller]

I should say, slightly democrat leaning.. or at least they seem to support the democrats more than the republicans (but still support republicans often).

JM

[chequita guevara]

Reality has a well known liberal bias.

[DanS]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
Hmm

OK, so I was just wrong expecting the editorial to be as good as the Washington Post (which while slightly left leaning, is still fair..)

JM

The WaPo editorial page is Washington establishment, with a center-left outlook. It's fairness is a little tricky when you take this fact into consideration.

I haven't read the WSJ editorial page enough to know where it attacks the GOP power brokers, etc.