The War at the Wall Street Journal details the takeover of Dow Jones by Rupert Murdoch. The staff of the Journal had a feeling of "exceptionalism" and admired their detailed analysis. They were afraid of the populist Murdoch. The Bancroft family that owned a controlling interest in Dow Jones felt they were protecting an important national treasure. They were deeply concerned about the "editorial independence" of the newspaper, yet they did not ask the staff for the details of why. (Yet another case of elites trying to represent others that they do not understand.)
The Bancroft family were not one unified force, and had some that wanted to sell, while others felt it was important to not let the company fall into the hands of the Fox News owner. They were business neophytes and had inadvertently told the world that the company was for sale. In the end, Murdoch's deal was something they could not turn down. The newspaper industry was suffering, and there were not any other significant suitors. In retrospect they lucked out. The "great recession" occurred shortly after the deal closed. News Corp's value plummeted, and they had to write down a significant amount of the purchase price of Dow Jones.
Would things be better if the company was not sold? Or would the newspaper have just gone bankrupt? And isn't it ironic that a company that advocates strongly for the free market finds itself more concerned with the "editorial independence" than providing what the market needs?
No comments:
Post a Comment