They say a liberal is a conservative who’s just been arrested, but let me modernise that aphorism slightly: a liberal is a conservative journalist who’s about to be downsized or outsourced.
The Wall St Journal, currently threatened by a fiscally inexplicable yet politically perfectly explicable bid for the paper by Rupert Murdoch, has been responsible for some of the most egregious untruths about the effects of unfettered tree trade, globalisation and Republican economic ‘policy’, not to mention its lies and exaggerations about the case for and conduct of the Iraq war and it’s self-interested spiel (USA No 1; all are equal butl some are more equal than others; God loves the almighty dollar) has caused untold worldwide misery.
So I must say I’m rather enjoying watching them get all militant about the Murdoch/WSJ merger.
Wall Street Journal Reporters Are Takin’ it to the Streets!
Wow. Yesterday, when we got word that the Murdoch-Bancrofts courtship was going to go on for an additional three weeks, we thought to ourselves, “Sweet fancy Moses! Could the media story of 2007 get any duller?” Props to the reporters of the Wall Street Journal, then, who today injected a dose of much needed excitement back into the proceedings by staging a nationwide no-show this morning.
A key excerpt from the “statement from Wall Street Journal reporters”:
“Dow Jones currently is in contract negotiations with its primary union, seeking severe cutbacks in our health benefits and limits on our pay. It is beyond debate that the professionals who create The Wall Street Journal and other Dow Jones publications every day deserve a fair contract that rewards their achievements. At a time when Dow Jones is finding the resources to award golden parachutes to 135 top executives, it should not be seeking to eviscerate employees’ health benefits and impose salary adjustments that amount to a pay cut.”
Says a WSJ employee:
“…what is Murdoch going to do if the entire staff revolts? He can’t simply fire them all and easily replace them with people just out of journalism school.””
Oh no, you think not? Let me remihd you….
Wapping was the most vicious dispute ever perpetrated. After 15 months of so-called negotiations on the move out of Fleet Street, Rupert Murdoch provoked the strike that he had cynically wanted in a plot cooked up with his lawyers. Overnight, 5,000 people were sacked, and Murdoch’s plan was put into action. His secret workforce, men and women lured from unemployment blackspots with a promise of a prosperous future, arrived by the coachload.
Week in, week out, I attended the demonstrations and as the weeks turned to months, I watched the lives of people I’d known and worked with for years unravel. There were suicides, marriage break-ups; people lost their homes. Twenty years may have passed but those sacked overnight – secretaries, researchers and cashiers as well as printers – still bear the scars of Wapping today.
Events on the picket line are seared into my memory. The police would wait until the early hours of the morning, when most people had gone, then clear the remaining pickets. With no regard to safety, officers on horseback would charge people, driving them out of Wapping Highway. As the policemen finished their shifts for the night and headed off in their coaches, they would jubilantly wave their overtime pay packets at us, along with their copies of the Sun
The strike ended after a long bloody year, but the consequences of Murdoch’s victory are still felt by the industry today. Other employers rushed to exploit the opportunities he’d opened up. When it comes to cutting costs and creaming off bigger profits, newspaper bosses have slavishly followed Murdoch’s example.
His promises of a bright new future for journalism never materialised, just like the swimming pool he promised for the new plant. Wages for journalists have slumped in real terms. Far too many are desk-bound, and staffing levels are inadequate in many national titles as well as in the regional press. Instead of investing in quality journalism, companies are spending millions on promotional gimmicks, and as a result we’re awash with CDs that nobody wants to listen to.
Murdoch has used the profits from his newspaper titles to extend his grip on other industries, such as sport, through BSkyB. One way or another, most people in this country line his pockets. Yet he pays next to no tax in the UK; he changed his nationality to further his business interests, and considers he’s got the right to choose our next prime minister.
Murdoch is squeezing his other publications hard to pay for this WSJ takeover, with 100 jobs gone at Wapping already this year.
News Corp’s print titles have been punching above their weight for years. Unfortunately, this trend came to a halt during 2006, when papers contributed 16 per cent of revenues, but only 13 per cent of operating profits. Murdoch blames the business cycle for his newspapers’ recent poor performance. Here and in the US, interest rates are riding high and consumer spending remains sluggish. Since late-2005, advertisers have been tightening the purse strings with gusto.
On the horizon, however, a game-changing prospect looms – the possibility that News Corp investors might be asked to stump up a steep $5bn to acquire Dow Jones. Murdoch has plenty of ideas for expanding the Wall Street Journal’s revenue base. But in the short term, these plans will suck even more cash out of News Corp.
At the back of Hinton’s mind must be a concern that News Corp is planning to squeeze its British titles further – this time, to pay for Rupert’s proposed adventures in Manhattan.
The WSJ journos jobs are no safer, though they can protest as much as they like. Rupert doesn’t like unions, and he needs the cash. Look to see an influx of ex-WSJ types looking to make a bit of money into the blogosphere sometime soon. They can always join that bastion of journalistic integrity, Pyjamas Media..
I hear they’re looking for a replacement for Pam Atlas.
