No Box Scores, But...
Written: Dec 06 '99
|
Product Rating:
|
|
| Quality of news coverage: |
 |
|
| Quality of editorial content: |
|
|
|
Pros: High degree of journalistic integrity
Cons: Not my usual cup of tea, subject-wise
|
|
|
| mshawpyle's Full Review: Wall Street Journal |
I expect that most of the devoted readers of the WSJ are, well, avid little pinstripers, chaps in trade, wannabe CEOs. Ignore that fact.
Yes, the _Journal_ is the source of first resort for beancounters, brokers, and Brooks Bros buyers. It is the go-to resource for those who become profoundly engaged in such concerns as rumblings in rail, confusion in commodities, in-fighting in industrials, and skullduggery in sales figures. When Pacific Northwestern utilities companies are about to implode all over the front page of the common newspaper, as happened in the early '80s, the _Journal_ will always be there to say, smugly, 'Scooped you a month back.' As they did. And there is no question but that they do scoop the pack, they are the source of first resort in the US and largely in the world for financial news (though the old pink 'un, London's _Financial Times_, has its own battle honors). They do so because they are practitioners of a largely moribund art of journalism, one totally unmoved by sob stories, human interest, social concerns, or all the other fads in the current journalistic environment that seem so nice and warm and fuzzy until yet another piece is exposed (as happens among 'socially conscious' news outlets with depressing regularity) as a hoax and a fraud.
There is a joke that if God called the _New York Times_ to announce the end of the world, the _Times_ would want an exclusive; and if they didn't get one, and God accordingly called up other desks at other papers, the next day would see the following headlines:
_New York Times_: 'End of World Announced; Story on Page 57';
_Wall Street Journal_: 'God Forecasts Bad Third Quarter, Armageddon;
Some Markets to Close Early'; and
_Washington Post_: 'White Male Deity Threatens Globe; Women, Children,
Minorities Expected to Suffer Most'.
The _Journal_ is self-evidently narrow in view; but compared to the touchy-feely news organizations that have given us faked Pulitzer winners, it deserves credit for what it does.
Why, though, would I - who am less than uninterested in its usual beats, unless they are background in an Emma Lathen mystery novel - read the WSJ on occasion? Because, which is often overlooked, their editorials are on a far higher plane than any this side of the *real*, the London _Times_, and because their books coverage and allied arts and entertainment coverage is superior. (This should really be no surprise: what ever did you think the CEOs' wives cared about? The Met, of course, and All That.) Other than a pious, nostalgic interest in what happens to cotton, crude, and cattle, I am not their demographic cup of tea; but for this quality of journalism, regardless of subject, I am willing to go to considerable lengths. You should, too.
Recommended:
Yes
Describe the newspaper's political views: It is conservative
|
|
|
|
Epinions.com ID:
mshawpyle
|
 - Top 500 |
|
Member: Markham Shaw Pyle, JD
Location: Houston, Texas
Reviews written: 539
Trusted by: 391 members
About Me:
Historian, baseballing bon vivant, Boll Weevil, W&L man; and the Walter Mitty of field sports
|
|
|
- Add to My Yahoo!: 
- Add to Google Homepage: 
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.