Fox News Buys The Wall Street Journal / DJIA

Fox News Buys The Wall Street Journal / DJIA

news.bbc.co.uk

"He tries to pick like-minded editors, editors who share, broadly share his world view of things,"

"He is an, I wouldn't say interfering, I would say he's an interventionist proprietor when he wants to be, but I guess, you know, if you own the title, then I guess you're allowed to intervene."

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
en.wikipedia.org
video.google. com
en.wikipedia.org

If you have not seen outfoxed, you need to as you absorb this tidbit of information.

Google Video Search: Outfoxed

The Company is currently the target of a bid by News Corporation. It was reported on 1st August 2007 that the bid has been successful after an extended period of uncertainty about shareholder agreement. The deal is worth US$5 billion or $60 a share, giving NewsCorp control of the Wall Street Journal and ending the Bancroft family's 105 years of ownership

my jaw hangs open,

Sri Oracle

news.bbc.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 1-8-2007 by Sri Oracle]

Yes, but the prime mover, and owner of Newscorp, is Rupert Murdoch.

He's claimed he won't allow the WSJ to change, but the website will be free from some point on.

He's the Aussie William Randolph Hearst. Hearst did a lot of damage to people. Let's hope Murdoch is a better man.

I won't hold my breath, though.

The Jerk Premium

How much extra did Rupert Murdoch have to pay to buy Dow Jones, just because of who he is?
By Daniel Gross
Posted Thursday, Aug. 2, 2007

"On April 30, Dow Jones stock closed at $36.33. On May 1, the company confirmed that Murdoch had bid $60 per share, or about $5 billion. That represented a huge 65.15 percent premium—and a price the stock hadn't seen since April 2002."


"a company not synonymous with right-wing bias, shoddy journalism, and a meddling boss—could have taken Dow Jones for a 25 percent premium to the $36.33 per share price—$45.41 per share, or about $3.78 billion."

Wallstreet Journal now under control of Rupert Murdoch (some people use words like zionist, fascist, powerful, elitist), the billioniare, releases this statement yesterday:

www.freepress.net...

People close to News Corp. emphasized the digital-business opportunities of Dow Jones. Mr. Murdoch has been particularly vocal in the past couple of years about the newspaper industry’s need to adjust to the Internet.

Wikipedia, 1984, Orwell

In the book, Winston is a clerk for the Ministry of Truth, where his job is to rewrite historical documents so that they match the current party line, which changes on a daily basis.

Rupert Murdoch deems what can and cannot be said on Myspace just like the 3 Amigos deem what can be discussed at ATS.

Rupert Murdoch deems what can and cannot be said on Fox News just like the 3 Amigos deem what can be discussed at ATS

Rupert Murdoch now deems what can be said in one of the worlds most trusted, and long established, famously fair, famously impartial Wall Street Journal; always printed on paper.

Now he can leverage his agenda, name and party unmentioned, on the internet, with a WSJ emblem in the background.

Image is everything they say.

And you're telling me... that after 3 days of knowing that fox news buys wsj for 6 billion cash (possibly borrowed cash)... nobody out there on a conspiracy site is alarmed?

Knock Knock anyone home?

I am,

Sri Oracle


[edit on 3-8-2007 by Sri Oracle]

Here is some background...


On July 18th:

Dow Jones Board Agrees to Recommend News Corp. Acquisition

and on May 7th:

Murdoch Acquisition of Dow Jones Could Threaten CNBC, Reuters

NEW YORK (May 1, 2007)

Dow Jones Confirms Receipt of Unsolicited Acquisition Proposal from News Corporation

Is there another thread about this on ats that I'm missing?

Originally posted by Sri Oracle

Rupert Murdoch deems what can and cannot be said on Myspace just like the 3 Amigos deem what can be discussed at ATS.

Rupert Murdoch deems what can and cannot be said on Fox News just like the 3 Amigos deem what can be discussed at ATS

I think you'll find that your above comments could'nt be further from the truth.

I would'nt say that the 3 Amigo's run this place like Murdoch runs his establishments, thank god too.

As far as i'm aware, and please correct me if i'm wrong here, but the only time you'll see ATS management dictating what is said on ATS, is if either there is a legal issue or a gross disregard for the site terms and conditions.

Never do you see ATS staff censoring good reporting from members, no matter what side of the story may be being put across.

Murdoch on the other hand.........

Just thought i'd point that one out.

CX.

Originally posted by CX
Never do you see ATS staff censoring good reporting from members, no matter what side of the story may be being put across.

Murdoch on the other hand.........

Just thought i'd point that one out.

CX.

I am with you... I give the amigos kudos for their impartiality... hell... I'm here. But, as owners, they do have the power to censor the community (and they do to a small degree; ie drug discussion)

Murdoch now has the power to censor the WSJ.

and based upon history he is likely to use that power... to a much larger degree.

Sri