digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About

Rupert Murdoch gets Dow Jones for $5 BILLION

telegraph.co.uk — Rupert Murdoch has succeeded with his $5bn (£2.5bn) bid for Dow Jones, owners of the Wall Street Journal, according to a report in The Business. Negotiations are finished and the board is confident the terms of the deal will be accepted by the Bancroft family, which controls a majority of voting shares in Dow Jones.

Who dugg this? Made popular Jul 6, 2007

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

107 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • jkbowman, on 10/11/2007, -9/+95WSJ : RIP
  • cindylauper, on 10/11/2007, -7/+63It's time to boycott fox...not just fox news...but everything owned and operated by news corp!
  • tgilber, on 10/11/2007, -0/+54Well, umm, I don't know about my other 300 million fellow Americans, but I was not consulted on this deal...
  • rdizzle, on 10/11/2007, -2/+36Dumb asses. This isn't true.
    http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/primenewswire/122483.htm
  • rdizzle, on 10/11/2007, -3/+25wrong.
    http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/primenewswire/122483.htm
  • InetRoadkill, on 10/11/2007, -4/+25Goodbye WSJ. I'm cancelling my subscription this afternoon. I imagine there's going to be a mass defection of staff in the near future.
  • whatthefu, on 10/11/2007, -4/+20That ***** sucks.
  • freakk123, on 10/11/2007, -5/+20F-Bomb.
  • inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+14I bought A Walstreet Journal today for like $5, and Murdoch buys THE Wallstreet Journal for $5b. Seems crazy that two people can be on such different income levels. then again, i should be working right now..
  • cindylauper, on 10/11/2007, -2/+14Download it off a torrent site...I love the simpsons....but do they need more money? I say Boycott everything!
  • mattxb, on 10/11/2007, -0/+10He outbid me by two billion
  • Lisztman, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11I'm a conservative, and I hate what Murdoch did to the news media.
    I don't want his grubby hands all over my precious WSJ.

    The man literally dictates to the Fox News people what he wants them to say, rather than allowing them to be real journalists.
  • seanmc303, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8Only Rupert and the shareholders of the Dow Jones have any say. Americans have no say in who buys what from whom.
  • Folye, on 10/11/2007, -3/+11Dang it, the Wall Street Journal was one of the few news sources I could actually read that wasn't controlled by this a-hole... Now I'll just have to get all my news from Comedy Central!
  • mattbdavis, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8Here lies the death of the greatest newspaper whose bias was capitalism. /mourn

    Now what am I going to read on the crapper?
  • truspark, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7Actually technically we do. It's called Congress. But corporations found a way around that - they bought them too.
  • mdkoch84, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8No one ever cheered Clinton for pardons or perjury. If they did, they're idiots. I think you might want to do a little more research into why people dislike News Corp and Fox before jumping to the conclusion that its b/c they 'kicked our ass'. News Corp and Fox has been proven time and again to publish inaccurate reports and make slanderous remarks on a regular basis.

    And just for that last comment, I dugg you UP so people can see how big of a ***** you are.
  • LowRentDiggs, on 10/11/2007, -3/+9Who will pay for a black & white version of USA Today Business? That's what the Journal will become, 3 paragraph feel good business stories. Nevermind, plenty of people will pay for it...
  • inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6He's going to get a ton of frequent flyer miles on his visa for this.
  • truspark, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6doubt it. All the morons I see heading to Wall Street on the trains every morning already read the NY Post. It really doesn't take a rocket scientist to make money on Wall Street - the absence of a conscience will do just fine.
  • Mearn, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/primenewswire/122483.htm

    Don't mind me, just abusin' some comments to point out the complete inaccuracy of this story.
  • NinjaBoy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Man and with that headline there is no way its going to get burried.
  • Lisztman, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Thanks for the counterpoint.
    This seemed rather outrageous.
  • inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6Rupert Murdoch can kiss my ass.
  • inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5I guess tommorrow they will start putting up stories about the Bush doing a heck of a job. :/
  • skippay, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Ya, stick a fork in it.

    Best hope is for a quick death and a resurrection in another place for the soon-to-be-fleeing staff
  • noahbk, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6I'm canceling my account the day the deal is made. Shame on you WSJ.
  • Rigbymatt, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Is it bad that I trust Comedy Central over Fox News?
  • neoptolemus, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6I just canceled my WSJ subscription.
  • childermass, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Even if it hasn't happened yet, it's expected to eventually go through. Murdoch will make changes. Things like the quirky middle column will be gone, and he'll focus more on news, trying to compete with the NYT, in addition to making the weekend edition bigger. I don't think Murdoch buying the paper, in itself, is bad, if he's learned from his past journalistic errors. There will be significantly more pressure on him owning this paper than any other, so, he has the money to invest in newspapers, and if he can do so without affecting the journalistic integrity of the news staff, then it's a win-win. If he does affect the integrity, I imagine you'll see mass defections from the staff as well.

    In reading a book now by Robert Fisk, a British journalist, he details a time in 1988, when the US shot down an Iranian passenger jet during the Iraq/Iran war and how it was likely based on US error, and Fisk, who wrote the Times in London, wrote a story that was heavily edited to appease Murdoch's sensibilities. It did not explicitly come from Murdoch, but it was understood what Murdoch wanted. If that mentality exists at WSJ, then it's in trouble. I get the feeling that it won't. If it did, the Bancroft's likely wouldn't be selling.
  • ishwarchand, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Being an Indian, all I want to know is that when are these money crazed bastards are going to to compensate the death of the 1000s of Indians. A crime committed in 1984!! More than 20 years later, with the compensation amount set at like millions of dollars, all they do is blame it on the original company and refuse to pay the damages. If you buy a company, then its losses are also supposed to be borne by you.
  • realwx, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3myspace?
  • TheTorontonian, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4THIS IS HILARIOUS!
    I can't wait until the WSJ starts posting the "sunshine girl" on their centerfold!

    My God, how could they allow this? A media empire owning and running the finance world?
    That is just so messed up in so many levels.
  • heepajunk, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6Another piece of America just died.
  • NinjaBoy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Yeah i let him have my vote so i could watch American idol.
  • MWeather, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4Is that what those daily talking point memos are? A hands off approach?
  • kushed, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3I already do.
  • Tenlow, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4I'll make sure you get a copy of that memo next time
  • inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3My cancellation is in the mail......
  • conceptkid, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3meh, cant be any worse than the Bancroft family (which seems like its falling apart). At least the control wont be spread out between a bunch of elite bastards, now it will just be one elite bastard, we will know who to blame
  • mdkoch84, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3its just fuel to the fire for the murdoch propaganda machine. and the WSJ is one of the few respected newspapers around.
  • MacMan88, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2fb not news corp.
  • vinwal, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3And the NWO agenda marches on....
  • mdkoch84, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4have you been living under a rock? Murdoch has openly said his newspapers will spread his point of view. case and point, Fox News, created to combat the liberal bias in the media.
  • JESUSREAM, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Oh good, now the wsj can tell me who "Mr 9-11" is.
  • brhoades, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3HEY!!!! IT DIDN'T HAPPEN!!http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/primenewswire/122483.htm
  • inactive, on 10/11/2007, -9/+11Not such a big deal. If he doesnt own it some other rich jerk off will. its not like theres a ton of competition at the FIVE BILLION dollar mark.
  • springo, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Spiderman! Spiderman! Please stop him, he stole our objective source of information!
  • skippay, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Bad for whom?
  • Authustian, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Lol, shades of the BBC reporting the collapse of WTC building 7. What do you bet when the market closes tonight (being a friday) the deal is formally announced.

    And for bonus points, name the location or event that will dominate the news this weekend...

    /puts on foil hat.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 106 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...

© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.