Tuesday, June 12, 2007 | I hope Bob Page is right about Rupert Murdoch’s takeover of the Wall Street Journal.

I get both the New York Times and the WSJ, plus the U-T. Maybe that’s a sign of old age, but it’s also the rampant desire of a 20-year veteran of the newspaper business and now a historian [with seveb published books] for “the latest.”

Comparing the Times and the WSJ, I find the Times often wears its heart on the front page, seeming to treat sympathetically even people who are victims of their own stupidity, crassness, or addictions.

By contrast, the WSJ has a cheeky tone and far more intellectual stance toward the news of the day.

If we could just get Murdoch to promise that the WSJ articles will NOT be cut, that tough topics will still be covered and that the reader will not be treated to “news bites.”

Leave a comment

We expect all commenters to be constructive and civil. We reserve the right to delete comments without explanation. You are welcome to flag comments to us. You are welcome to submit an opinion piece for our editors to review.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.