There is a widespread belief in the US that editorializing in the Wall Street Journal is limited to the editorial page. We’ve seen in the past that this just ain’t so (see posts of January 12 and January 16). And today we have a doozy. We have a real news event, reported as the lead […]
Read more...One of the dangers of blogging is that it is easy to shoot from the hip, so I hope I am not guilty of responding in kind to a remarkably fact-devoid post from the Economist’s Free Exchange. This post, which argues that the savings of having a health care system that substitutes preventive care for […]
Read more...What is and isn’t fair reporting is very much in the eye of the beholder. However, it seems odd that a story that the Financial Times thought important enough to run on its first page has gotten no play in the US: Democrats look to boost investor rights Signs are emerging of a Democratic effort […]
Read more...OK, so it was only a speech by the president of the New York Fed, Tim Geithner, to the Council on Foreign Relations. But the disparity in reporting between the Financial Times, both in placement and content, and the Wall Street Journal (and to some degree Bloomberg) is striking. Not surprisingly, the WSJ downplayed the […]
Read more...Dealbreaker.com thinks so, and links to a Reuters story to bloster their view. You be the judge: Totally terrifying thought. But not beyond the range of the barely credible. We’ve written a lot about SEC regulation. And sometimes it did seem as if the SEC was listening. After we celebrated the court decision striking down […]
Read more...In case any of you felt the misguided impulse to come to the defense of the Wall Street Journal’s editors (see our post of December 24), consider Eric Alterman’s commentary on the paper’s redesign: Letters to the editor have been moved off the editorial page to page B10 or 11. Normally I wouldn’t mind this, […]
Read more...