Talking about the Wall Street Journal last week, one of my libertarian friends announced that he would cancel his subscription if he didn’t work in finance.
Conversely, the WSJ is a great read for me. We quote it frequently.
Simply lost and overwhelmed by the NYT online (the only place I read), WSJ is faster by far, even on fashion, and connects events via a business lens, which I believe rules the world. I sense they actualy talk about the benefits of microfinance and pitfalls of new capitalism at WSJ.
Also the search function at NYT is the worst one on the Internet. Totally hopeless, and I’ve tried endless times.
Reading New York Magazine’s cover story The Raging Septuagenarian, I wasn’t clear that Rupert Murdoch is devoted to taking down the NYTimes. Interesting.
As a peon in cyberspace, let me that that the NYT had better worry about WSJ, with or without the often offensive, obnoxious, bully man behind some of the most financially successful media outlets on the planet.
As for that NYT internal discussion about charging $30 a month for the privilege of reading it online? Forget it.
We live in the digital age. Perhaps if the 25 best media outlets around the world band together and all charge the same price, the NYT strategy will work.
I like WSJ because while the free articles are comparatively few, next to NYT, 50% of the time they get my attention. I’m habitually lost in the NYT — literally investing precious time trying to find my way around.
Curation is the future, and I mean curator not only as lowly aggregator, but as subject-focused librarian and explicit meaning maker and dot connector. Sneer at the multi-media curator. She/he’s an important figure in the future of journalism, because connecting dots is allowed.
August minds reign at the New York Times, but I suggest they take Rupert Murdoch very seriously, now that I know I’m not clueless when I say to friends: “I now go to WSJ before NYT”. Anne