Talking Biz News

Information about business
journalism from the
Carolina Business News Initiative.

Forbes.com columnist Gary Weiss wonders on his blog Saturday about what will happen to Dow Jones & Co. publication Barron’s, which has not been mentioned in its negotiations with News Corp. and was not mentioned in the editorial safeguards agreed upon by the two companies.

Weiss wrote, “Under this agreement, the editor of Barron’s can be replaced immediately, and this publication could immediately be used as a showpiece for News Corp. staffers and editorials. Its staffers could be immediately utilized by the new Fox business news channel.

“Or at least, that’s what I would do if I were Rupert Murdoch. I’d put one of my own people in charge of Barron’s ASAP.

“I wonder if this omission is a reflection of the lack of importance given to Barron’s by both sides.”

Read more here.

Anyone who launches a new business magazine in this day is bonkers. The publishers of the already flourishing self-help magazine ‘Going Bonkers - The Self-Help Magazine with a Sense of Humor’ couldn’t agree more, so that’s why they’re doing it.

On July 1, ‘Going Bonkers Business Edition - The Business Magazine with a Sense of Humor’ will launch on www.gbonkers.com. The new publication will have the same easy reading, pick it up-put it down style, as the original self-help version. Business articles will be plentiful, practical and rich with information. Topics for the inaugural issue include:

·   Rebels Rule! How to Break the Rules and Succeed
·   How to Motivate the Unmotivated
·   Bosses Behaving Badly: Work for a Jerk and Succeed Anyway
·   Make the Most of Your White Space
·   How to Really Read Your Financial Statements

“I couldn’t agree with the critics more,” says Matthew Sheppard, managing partner of RS Holdings, an investment holding company backing the launch. “However, the style and content of the self-help version was so appealing and compelling that it overcame any initial resistance we had to a business edition.”

The agreement that is supposed to protect journalists at The Wall Street Journal from interference by News Corp. executives if the company acquires Dow Jones & Co., the newspaper’s parent, has been posted on the paper’s Web site Friday night.

Here’s the good stuff:

The authority of the managing editor and the editorial page editor of the WSJ and the managing editor of Newswires (unless, in the case of the managing editor of Newswires, he or she reports to the managing editor of the WSJ) will include:

• the power to hire and remove subordinates within their respective publications and operations, consistent with departmental budgets,

• control over spending and allocation of resources within departmental budgets set by N Corp management following discussion with the relevant editor; the decisions of N Corp on departmental budgets will be final.”

Later, it states more powers for the editors that included:

• The managing editor of the WSJ would be consulted prior to the use of the WSJ or Dow Jones brand names by N Corp or any other party to give the managing editor the opportunity to raise any objections to and suggestions concerning the proposed use of the brand. The decisions of N Corp on branding matters would be final. 
• In the case of the managing editors, authority over use of staff by advertisers and other business, 
• In the case of the WSJ editorial page editor (1) authority to choose the editorial board members, the opinion columnists, the op-ed section editor and the editors of the book review, the Leisure & Arts section, OpinionJournal.com and the Far Eastern Economic Review, (2) final say over the positions taken by the editorial page and (3) authority over the selection of op-ed pieces. The editorial page editor would continue to report to the WSJ publisher, 
• N Corp agrees that the following persons will be retained on their positions following closing, Marcus Brauchli (WSJ managing editor), Paul Gigot (WSJ editorial page editor) and Neal Lipschutz (Newswires managing editor)

Read more here.

Josh Quittner, the editor of Business 2.0 magazine, notes that business writers for Newsweek and USA Today who have written positive books about Apple are among those who received advance versions of the new iPhone to write a review before its Friday launch.

Quittner’s magazine, on the other hand, did not receive one in advance.

Quittner wrote, “I also—and I’m sorry for this, because I hear he’s a very nice guy—simply can’t bear to read Pogue’s reviews of Apple products. (His video is adorable, though.) I like him on other stuff, especially cameras. But he should not be allowed to review Apple stuff. I mean, the man has a whole side business writing “Missing Manual” books explaining how to wring the most out of your Apple products!

“He appears as the talent on Apple ‘geek cruises’ for crying out loud. (Though in his defense, he says he doesn’t take any pay for these gigs, but instead enjoys a discounted cruise vacation for himself and his family.) Oh, and, in the interests of full disclosure, Edward Baig, of USAT, wrote Macs for Dummies and iPhones. And Steven Levy wrote the books Insanely Great: The Life and Times of the Macintosh, the Computer that Changed Everything and The Perfect Thing, a great book about the iPod phenomenon.

“I am sure this had absolutely nothing to do with why Steve Jobs decided to give these guys review units two weeks before the rest of us, who are clearly on the C team (and the C, here, I can tell you, stands for chopped liver.)”

Read more here.

Gary Weiss, the author of “Wall Street versus America,” takes issue with a decision by the New York Times advertising department to allow an ad in the paper Friday that took issue with a column that chief financial correspondent Floyd Norris wrote.

The company is Universal Express, and Norris had written a column about an SEC investigation into the company and its allegations that it was a victim of naked short selling.

On his blog, Norris posted a comment from Stephen Jasperson, the newspaper’s director of advertising accountability, that stated in part: “It is the policy of the New York Times to accept advertising that disagrees with our reporting, whether it be on international affairs, business news, or our own editorials. Universal Express has done exactly that, as well as comment on their own court case. We do this because we believe that this ad and many like it are part and parcel of a free press. To limit a company’s right to free expression to voice their opinions would, in our opinion, cut off an important vehicle of free speech.”

Weiss responded by stating: “I’m afraid I must take issue with Mr. Jesperson. The New York Times owes it to its readers to not allow its pages to be forums for corporate lies and blame-shifting.”

Later, he added, “Also there is an irony in Mr. Jesperson’s comment about stocks needing to be registered with the SEC, because Universal Express has been selling unregistered stock on a massive scale, according to the SEC.”

Read more here.

Lisa Snedeker of Media Life magazine writes Friday afternoon that despite what appears to be a deal allowing News Corp. to buy Dow Jones & Co., the parent of The Wall Street Journal, coming closer to reality, it actually is tenuous.

Snedeker wrote, “For any deal to work, it must arise from a sense of shared interest, such that when the deal’s done both parties can move forward. They have to present a united front, and for several reasons. They need protect the value of the stock, which means putting on a good face for Wall Street, but they also need to stem the flight of talent from the paper that would result from a messy deal.

“They need a deal that brings about stability.

“But this deal still has lots of problems, and not the least is a workforce, led by the Journal editorial staff, that’s dead set against it.

“Among the issues is a ongoing dispute over their contract. Union members are going to want a new contract before any sale, knowing full well that a new owner would be inclined to demand salary cuts. The union has also been seeking out other potential buyers, including supermarket magnate Ron Burkle and investor Warren Buffett, among others.”

Read more here.

Bernie Kohn, the business editor of the Baltimore Sun in Maryland, e-mailed with this incident with a business reporter at his paper:

“A few weeks ago one of my reporters was asked by a non-profit association to be on a media panel at its annual conference. Yesterday she learned that her registration fee for the conference had been paid for - without her knowledge or consent - by a company whose name has surfaced in a scandal she has been covering.

“When she was told this was a sponsorship arrangement that had been agreed to with this company - which apparently was covering the registration for everyone on the panel - she canceled her appearance.

“I mention this only as a cautionary note to business reporters and editors asked to be on panels by non-journalism groups. This is not something we would have thought to ask about in advance. I hope it might prevent someone from ending up in an embarrassing situation.”

Bill Moyers, the PBS show host, writes on the Huffington Post Friday that the proposed purchase of Dow Jones & Co., the parent of The Wall Street Journal, by News Corp. CEO Rupert Murdoch is just another example of how he has used journalism for his own purpose.

Moyers wrote, “Murdoch and The Journal’s editorial page are made for each other. They’ve both pursued the right’s corporate and political agenda of the past quarter century. Both venerate what The Journal editorials call the ‘animal spirits’ of business. But The Journal’s newsroom is another matter — there facts are sacred and independence revered. Rupert Murdoch has told the Bancrofts he’ll not meddle with the reporting. But he’s accustomed to using journalism as a personal spittoon. In the months leading up to the invasion of Iraq, he turned the dogs of war loose in the newsrooms of his empire and they howled for blood. Murdoch himself said the greatest thing to come out of the war would be ‘$20 a barrel for oil.’

“Of course he wasn’t the only media mogul to clamor for war. And he’s not the first to use journalism to promote his own interests. His worst offense with FOX News is not even its baldly partisan agenda. Far worse is the travesty he’s made of its journalism. FOX News huffs and puffs, pontificates and proclaims, but does little serious original reporting. His tabloids sell babes and breasts, gossip and celebrities. Now he’s about to bring under the same thumb one of the few national newsrooms remaining in the country.

“But the problem isn’t just Rupert Murdoch. His pursuit of The Wall Street Journal is the latest in a cascading series of mergers, buy-outs, and other financial legerdemain that are making a shipwreck of journalism. Public minded newspapers are being dumped by their owners for wads of cash or crippled by cost cutting while their broadcasting cousins race to the bottom. Murdoch is just the predator of the hour. The modern maestro of a financial marketplace ruled by money and moguls. Instead of checking the excesses of private and public power, these 21st century barons of the First Amendment revel in them; the public be damned.”

Read more here.

William Powers of The National Review writes Friday that The Wall Street Journal will cease being The Wall Street Journal that has a reputation for credibility and integrity if News Corp. CEO Rupert Murdoch acquires it — even if he does nothing to change the paper.

Powers wrote, “This is the paradox at the heart of the mogul’s pursuit of Dow Jones, and in particular The Journal: He is trying to buy something he literally cannot have, at any price. It’s impossible for Rupert Murdoch to own The Wall Street Journal because when his name is on the masthead, it will no longer be The Wall Street Journal, not really.

“Great newspapers are not like other assets. Accountants and financial advisers cannot tote up their value. They are more like works of art. People pay a lot of money for van Goghs and Picassos, but unless they are speculators, they don’t buy them for their monetary value. They buy them because they possess intrinsic qualities — beauty, intelligence, subtlety, depth — that are unique in all the world. Great paintings keep appreciating precisely because of this uniqueness, and so do great newspapers.

“However, newspapers do differ from artworks in one way. The owner of a painting has no effect on the work itself, assuming it is properly cared for and protected from physical harm. But because a newspaper is a human institution, it can change completely overnight, depending on the skills and values of the people who own it and put it out every day. Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal will be to today’s Wall Street Journal as a poster of a great painting is to the painting itself — an imitation, evocative of the original and perhaps even pleasant to have around. But not the real thing.”

Read more here.

Sarah Ellison and Dennis Berman of The Wall Street Journal write Friday that Leslie Hill, a member of the Bancroft family that controls Dow Jones & Co., is looking for another bidder beside News Corp. CEO Dennis Bancroft to buy the company.

Ellis and Berman wrote, “In recent days, she has been scouring the East Coast, trying to drum up other offers for the company her family, the Bancrofts, has controlled for 105 years.

“Ms. Hill has pressed for Dow Jones management to meet with Brian Tierney, who led an investor group to buy the Philadelphia Inquirer last year; she helped encourage a hearing for Brad Greenspan, the co-founder of MySpace.com, who is trying to buy a quarter of Dow Jones; she threw herself into the minutiae of drafting editorial principles to protect the journalistic integrity of The Wall Street Journal and Dow Jones Newswires.

“A retired American Airlines pilot, Ms. Hill, 53 years old, often uses flight analogies to explain the situation facing Dow Jones. ‘If you are flying into an airport, you always have two backup airports in your flight plan,’ she has told some directors, according to someone who heard her. ‘That’s what Dow Jones needs — a backup plan.’”

Read more here.