Recent Blog Posts
-
The $4.5 Billion Dollar Bank Run
Nov 07 201111:20 am EDT -
The Times' Rorshach Geithner Story
Apr 27 20099:26 am EDT -
Sinking Animal Spirits
Apr 27 20098:45 am EDT -
Counter-cyclical Urban Policy
Apr 26 200910:00 am EDT -
Be Your Own Counterfeiter
Apr 26 20099:36 am EDT -
Being Tim Geithner
Apr 25 200912:37 pm EDT -
Notes From a Press Conference Naif
Apr 25 20099:41 am EDT -
What Good is the News?
Apr 25 20098:32 am EDT -
Stressful Enough
Apr 24 20092:29 pm EDT -
Not Regretting the Pound
Apr 24 20091:09 pm EDT
Links
- Felix Salmon

- DealBreaker

- Ryan Avent: The Bellows

- The Epicurean Dealmaker

- Chris Anderson

- Ultimi Barbarorum

- MarketBeat

- Michelle Leder

- John Quiggin

- The Panelist

- Andrew Leonard

- Streetsblog

- Brad Setser

- Michael Mandel

- Financial Crookery

- Kash Mansori

- Dean Baker

- Calculated Risk

- Free Exchange

- Curbed

- Lance Knobel

- Econospeak

- Carbon Tax Center

- Overcoming Bias

- Mark Thoma

- Naked Capitalism

- Alphaville

- Barry Ritholtz

- Alexander Campbell

- The Bayesian Heresy

- Brad DeLong

- DealBook

- Greg Mankiw

- Deal Journal

- FP Passport

- Carl Bialik

- Marginal Revolution

- A Fistful of Euros

- Dan Gross

Thomson-Reuters vs NewsCorp-Dow Jones
Alphaville has the memo from David Schlesinger, the editor-in-chief of Reuters, and a key member of the team which made the final decision to let their company be sold to Canada's Thomson.
Clearly, the Directors of the Reuters Founders Share Company had to approve of this new company. They did it because our partner and its controlling shareholder have similar values to the values Reuters has always been proud of and espoused. More importantly, they did it because the Reuter Trust Principles will now apply across the combined company, and not simply the part that came from Reuters. That gives the Trust Principles new power and life, and allows us to build on 156 years of tradition as a platform for a new century of growth...
As part of Thomson–Reuters, we will have the resources and a renewed will to expand our news coverage to inform and give insight to customers in their professional and personal lives.
One can't help but think of another public media company which is controlled by a small group of insiders: Dow Jones. While Schlesinger and his colleagues embraced the approach from Thomson, the Bancroft family felt that they should reject the approach from Rupert Murdoch. And the reason they felt that way was that Rupert Murdoch does not have similar values to the values they have always been proud of and espoused.
For all that I think the proposed acquisition of Dow Jones is a good idea, and will give Dow Jones "the resources and a renewed will to expand its news coverage," in the words of Schelsinger, the fact remains that Rupert Murdoch is a very different kind of press baron than the present owners of the Wall Street Journal.
Indeed, Murdoch's acquisition of Dow Jones must be contingent on his deliberately insulating the Wall Street Journal from his personal influence -- this is necessary because he does, regularly, interfere personally at other media properties he owns.
One can argue till the cows come home about the degree of influence that Murdoch personally exercises over his broadsheet properties. It's not huge, that much is clear – but it's definitely true that we Murdoch defenders are put on the back foot by having to try to restrict discussion about editorial influence to his broadsheets.
Murdoch's overall approach to his media properties is undoubtedly much more interventionist than the Bancrofts would ever be, which makes his proposed acquisition much more problematic than the relatively easy tie-up between Thomson and Reuters.
Comments
If you are commenting using a Facebook account, your profile information may be displayed with your comment depending on your privacy settings. By leaving the 'Post to Facebook' box selected, your comment will be published to your Facebook profile in addition to the space below.




