9 Comments Add your own

• 1. Jordan  |  July 31st, 2007 at 10:59 am

  Interesting. Last night I got a call from NBC News for a survey which is conjunction with, surprisingly, the Wall Street Journal.

• 2. Anonymous  |  July 31st, 2007 at 3:00 pm

  The WSJ Channel! The Fox Industrial Average! All the crap of Fox will have Dow Jones branded on it, and all the brands of Dow Jones will have Fox crapped on it. Congratulations.

  But on the bright side, there’s a good chance the Financial Times could end up being America’s leading name in business news.

  Sigh.

• 3. Everett W.  |  July 31st, 2007 at 5:05 pm

  I’d love to know how other networks would report the index if it actually gets renamed the Fox Industrial Average.

• 4. Anonymous  |  July 31st, 2007 at 5:14 pm

  At least Murdoch has a fig leaf of modesty with his assets. Could you imagine if he took the Trump route, naming everything after himself? The Rupert Murdoch Industrial Average! The Simpsons on RupeTV! And the movie on 20th Century Rupert! The Rupert Murdoch Journal with a little dot drawing of Rupert on the cover of every edition! Ugh.

• 5. John  |  August 1st, 2007 at 3:00 am

  Anon, don’t give him any ideas!

  I didn’t think there was room left for any more people at the Fox holiday party. Perhaps Rupe will rent out Madison Square Garden for this winter’s event.

• 6. Frank Catalano  |  August 1st, 2007 at 6:53 am

  I’m currently on hold with Dow Jones to cancel my long-standing Wall Street Journal subscription. I’ve been on hold a long time. I expect I’m not alone.

  While Murdoch has left some of his media acquisitions alone, they don’t tend to be the higher-profile ones (from what I recall). He’s worked so long, and paid so much, for the WSJ that I expect in six months to a year you’ll start seeing changes in its news coverage approach.

  Murdoch’s direct influence on editorial policy at many of his properties certainly has a historic and, in some countries, cultural basis. But that doesn’t mean I have to pay to support that habit.

• 7. Ralph  |  August 1st, 2007 at 9:14 am

  I suggest that those of us that have been loyal readers of the WSJ send a message and cancel our subscriptions. The WSJ Online is approaching readership of 1M. A 10% cancellation rate might get the attention of the board.

• 8. Frank Catalano  |  August 1st, 2007 at 10:43 am

  When I finally got through — after 20 minutes on hold and a disconnect the first time, then another 16 minutes on hold — I was told that, not surprisingly, they have been getting a large number of cancellations due to the Murdoch deal. However, they also expected a large number of cancellations on the first day.

  They also got a large number of cancellations immediately after switching the paper size, and after dropping the detailed stock and mutual fund listing tables, according to what the customer service rep told me.

  The key is whether cancellations continue past this initial spike. That will probably be noticed and be more worrisome to WSJ management and ownership.

  I’m not advocating this action for anyone other than me. But it’s interesting to note that they expect a spike in cancellations whenever there’s a major change in the WSJ product.

  Incidentally, the only way to cancel is either by phone with a live customer service rep, or by mail. There is no online option in part, I suspect, because it’s too easy. (Shades of AOL.)

• 9. Anon  |  August 7th, 2007 at 4:59 pm

  So Sad! Please see Outfoxed…You can see it on Google video for free!

Leave a Comment

Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed