Juan Antonio Giner sees virtues in Rupert Murdoch buying the Wall Street Journal, lampooning "the industry pundits" who have made "astonishing revelations" that he will control the editorial voice of the paper.
"Excuse me," writes Giner, "but I have been reading the WSJ for many years and the 'editorial voice' of the paper was, and is, one of the most right-wing voices of the newspaper world. But more than that. Do you know... ANY newspaper owner who doesn't control the 'editorial voice' of his paper? C'mon!
"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 multi-media 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 whether the people who run the company have a serious multi-media 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."
Interesting that Giner should write as "white knight" Brian Tierney offers himself as an alternative to Murdoch. Since he led the takeover of the Philadelphia Inquirer group last year he has been noted for cost-cutting. Some of his Philly staff have registered amazement at his Dow Jones interest. And his poor personal relationship with journalists is also a matter of record.
As for the idea of WSJ journalists being saved by Ron Burkle, his failure to launch a successful bid for the Tribune group suggests he can't possibly find a way of matching the Murdoch offer.
My money - not that I have much - is still on Murdoch, and I think there is some merit in Giner's viewpoint.
