Con Murdoch, el WSJ no sería más de derechas de lo que es ahora

Juan A. Giner defiende en What's Next: Innovations in Newspapers la oferta de compra de Murdoch sobre Dow Jones y critica la principal razón argumentada por los detractores de la operación: el magnate controlaría la "voz editorial" del diario:

The Wall Street Journal under Rupert Murdoch will NOT be able to be more right wing than it is now.

But The Wall Street Journal under Rupert Murdoch will perhaps have a better multimedia and online strategy and business management.

And perhaps he will invest and re-invest some of the money that the Bancroft family is pocketing today from profits and dividends.

If I were a journalist or an editor at the WSJ I would not be worried about who controls the “editorial voice” of the paper, but about if the people who run the company have a serious multimedia and online strategy, are ready to invest a lot of money in that vision and keep the newsroom doing its job as well as it has been — including the “editorial voice” of the editorial pages.

Y en otro comentario, defiende a Murdoch como alguien que conoce desde dentro el negocio del periodismo, no como los financieros que quieren controlar ahora el Dow Jones:

The Bancrofts and the Wall Street Journal don’t need to be afraid of Rupert Murdoch. They need to be worried about bad editors and bad publishers. Rupert Murdoch is not an outsider. He is us. As good and as bad as all of us in this industry could be. But he speaks our language. Not the language of the financial or real state moguls who want to control Dow Jones now.