3 ms·
Such is the conundrum with the WSJ. The op-ed section is beyond parody at this point (see the recent article attempting to pin SVB's collapse on 'wokeness'). Bu
by rchaud 4y ago
Such is the conundrum with the WSJ. The op-ed section is beyond parody at this point (see the recent article attempting to pin SVB's collapse on 'wokeness'). But at least the journalists remain committed to digging into stories.
The Theranos fraud was also discovered by a WSJ journalist who wasn't wowed by their ex-Pentagon and Beltway board members and puff pieces written about Holmes.
- ackbar03 4y agoThese guys should be awarded. That's fantastic
- 8ytecoder 4y agoYup, I get so mad at WSJ after reading one of their really stupid opinion pieces and then their real journalists will publish something really good. Almost like an abusive relationship. The FT is good but doesn’t always dig out the dirt like WSJ does (in the US).
- boeingUH60 4y agoIronically, WSJ is owned by Rupert Murdoch, who invested $100 million in Theranos. According to the famous book, Bad Blood, Elizabeth Holmes tried to get Murdoch to kill the story but he refused.
- NickC25 4y agoIronic indeed. Surprisingly ethical behavior from Murdoch - I wouldn't have expected such a person to take that kind of a hit on his $100 million investment.
- stickfigure 4y agoHe paid 50X that for the WSJ in 2007.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- dekhn 4y agoMaybe the real journalists from WSJ, NY Times, and the Economist could group up and make an actual news journal- with no editorials.