Jack Shafer of Reuters writes about the Wall Street Journal Europe scandal, in which the publisher pressured reporters to write stories for a business partner, and what it means for the special sections that many business media publish.
“The Financial Times, for example, hammers together special sections with laughable regularity. Yesterday’s FT special section, ‘Canadian Energy,’ contains big-ass ads from Chevron, Shell, and the American Petroleum Institute. Are you dying to read ‘Oil shifts country’s centre of gravity’? Does ‘Technology opens far-flung possibilities’ float your boat? Then grab a copy before they all disappear.
“The articles in most special sections aren’t embarrassing or unethical as much as they’re useless. You’ll rarely find a critical article in a special section, so why bother reading? The intended audience for special sections isn’t readers, it’s advertisers. As a rule, special sections are two steps up from supplements titled ‘Advertising Supplement,’ which are written by outside writers, and two steps down from a newspaper’s regular coverage. There are good special sections out there — I’m thinking of the ones that run in the Economist — but most of them suck.”
Read more here.
Fox Business host Larry Kudlow has no plans to leave his role amid reports detailing…
Morgan Meaker, a senior writer for Wired covering Europe, is leaving the publication after three…
Nick Dunn, who is currently head of CNBC Events as senior vice president and managing…
Wall Street Journal editor in chief Emma Tucker sent out the following on Friday: Dear…
New York Times metro editor Nestor Ramos sent out the following on Friday: We are delighted to…
Rahat Kapur of Campaign looks at the evolution The Wall Street Journal. Kapur writes, "The transformation…