The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
NYT: Why Doesn't the WSJ Become More Like Teen Vogue?
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From the New York Times news section:

Inside the Fight for the Future of The Wall Street Journal

A special team led by a high-level manager says Rupert Murdoch’s paper must evolve to survive. But a rivalry between editor and publisher stands in the way.

By Edmund Lee
April 10, 2021

The Wall Street Journal is a rarity in 21st-century media: a newspaper that makes money. A lot of money. But at a time when the U.S. population is growing more racially diverse, older white men still make up the largest chunk of its readership, with retirees a close second.

“The No. 1 reason we lose subscribers is they die,” goes a joke shared by some Journal editors.

Is the New York Times endorsing the factual validity of the Great Replacement Theory?

No, it’s in favor of the Great Replacement, which means the NYT is good. All that matters these days is who are the good guys and who are the bad guys. Of course, people who know the factual truth, such as by paying a lot of money to subscribe to the WSJ, are likely to make even more money.

But who cares? Money printer go BRRRRRRR.

Now a special innovation team and a group of nearly 300 newsroom employees are pushing for drastic changes at the paper, which has been part of Rupert Murdoch’s media empire since 2007. They say The Journal, often Mr. Murdoch’s first read of the day, must move away from subjects of interest to established business leaders and widen its scope if it wants to succeed in the years to come. The Journal of the future, they say, must pay more attention to social media trends and cover racial disparities in health care, for example, as aggressively as it pursues corporate mergers.

In other words, the Wall Street Journal should abandon its near monopoly on America’s high-earning white male decision-makers and instead compete with Jezebel, The Root, and Teen Vogue for the Woke barista audience.

Sounds like a plan!

It’s like how the Masters golf tournament should have Cardi B perform on the 12th green between shots. Sure, they might lose commercials for why you should buy Boeings instead of AirBuses, but they’d make up for it on volume of spots for weed delivery services.

That argument has yet to convince executives in the top ranks of the company. …

As the team was completing a report on its findings last summer, Mr. Murray found himself staring down a newsroom revolt. Soon after the killing of George Floyd, staff members created a private Slack channel called “Newsroomies,” where they discussed how The Journal, in their view, was behind on major stories of the day, including the social justice movement growing in the aftermath of Mr. Floyd’s death. Participants also complained that The Journal’s digital presence was not robust enough, and that its conservative opinion department had published essays that did not meet standards applied to the reporting staff. The tensions and challenges are similar to what leaders of other news organizations, including The Times, have heard from their staffs.

The obvious solution is to give in to the genius business intuitions of 20-something interns on the staff.

In July, Mr. Murray received a draft from Ms. Story’s team, a 209-page blueprint on how The Journal should remake itself called The Content Review. It noted that “in the past five years, we have had six quarters where we lost more subscribers than we gained,” and said addressing its slow-growing audience called for significant changes in everything from the paper’s social media strategy to the subjects it deemed newsworthy.

The report argued that the paper should attract new readers — specifically, women, people of color and younger professionals — by focusing more on topics such as climate change and income inequality.

After all, where else besides the WSJ can you find content on those topics?

Among its suggestions: “We also strongly recommend putting muscle behind efforts to feature more women and people of color in all of our stories.”

And, of course, more stories about women of color and their hair.

The Content Review has not been formally shared with the newsroom and its recommendations have not been put into effect, but it is influencing how people work: An impasse over the report has led to a divided newsroom, according to interviews with 25 current and former staff members.

The only solution is to increase the race and sex quotas for the kind of employees who are dividing the newsroom. Once all the Bad People are gone, then divisiveness will be over, forever.

 
Hide 129 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Polistra says:

    The Times should relax. The Wokification of the WSJ is coming along smoothly. Just glance at its reader comments for extra fun. So take it easy, NYT. Rome wasn’t destroyed in a day.

    • Agree: northeast, R.G. Camara
    • LOL: wren, HammerJack
  2. A whole generation has grown up without being given anything more than Harry Potter as a means to understand themselves. This is what results.

    Even worse, most SJW types are full on Slytherin while affecting to the Harry Potter house. No courage, only ambition and zero self-awareness. Extreme grandiosity disguised as being compassionate. Obviously the types to lecture the WSJ on how they should really be obsessing over idiot racial fantasies

    • Replies: @R.G. Camara
  3. Altai says:

    Never forget that the Washington Post hired a man to be a full-time TikTok maker. The US media has adopted the collective persona of a 15 year old girl with cluster B personality traits on social media over the last 7 years and has not yet become as vapid but aspires to be as vapid.

  4. Soon after the killing of George Floyd,

    Such a dumb and dishonest “news” outlet.

    • Troll: Supply and Demand
    • Replies: @Spud Boy
  5. Kronos says:

    I’m looking for it right now, but doesn’t the WSJ have a MUCH larger subscription base? (I’m currently bogged down with only digital subscription data, trying to find the absolute number of subscribers.)

    • Replies: @slumber_j
  6. Read The Economist.

    It’s much more sophisticated than Newsweek, Time, and the other stuff we get in America.

    • Agree: Kronos
    • LOL: J.Ross, HammerJack
    • Replies: @Kronos
    , @Squid
    , @Eric Novak
    , @sb
    , @NickG
  7. NYT: “How to put a competitor out of business”

    • Replies: @Forbes
    , @Spect3r
  8. In other words, the Wall Street Journal should abandon its near monopoly on America’s high-earning white male decision-makers …

    I’ve got no argument about the stupidity you feature here, Steve, but this would not at all be a bad thing. The Wall Street Journal has been for open borders, as far as I know since 2000. I’d been reading it every day for a year and a half, but I got sick of that crap and quit cold turkey back then on a day when it went up a quarter or fifty cents. Maybe we’d be better off if those big shots didn’t have that Globalism injection every weekday.

    What used to irk me is the WSJ’s way of writing about numerical changes ass-backwards. as in “due to profit taking, the transportation sector index went down to 2,350 from 2,475”, like that. (See “Taking the Wall Street Journal, ass-backwards”.)

    The report argued that the paper should attract new readers — specifically, women, people of color…

    People of color? It’s not USA Today. Except for the front page with some pastels, everything is in Black & White. The way they do that woodcut look on people’s pictures, People of Color will be end up looking like lawn jockeys. Do they want that look?

    • Replies: @John Johnson
    , @Odin
  9. My own experience with financial websites is that they have become wholly obsessed with marketing to blacks. Not minorities so much as blacks.

    The websites for my bank, my financial service company, and my HSA custodian, for example, all have black people on their front pages. No white men. No Asians. And no Hispanics. One interracial couple (black father and white mother with mixed-race child).

    It’s fascinating how quickly this kind of marketing saturated the entire market. Five years ago I don’t think a single minority was featured on these same websites.

  10. @Polistra

    Rome wasn’t destroyed in a day.

    Nice one, Polistra.

    • Agree: ic1000
    • Replies: @Polistra
  11. Yes, WSJ, the NYT, your rival, has only your bests interests in mind.

  12. Barnard says:

    I don’t know if you have seen any of the Masters this year, but nearly all the commercials by AT&T and IBM feature blacks. One of the IBM commercials has a rapper in it. I would estimate the viewers are less than 1% black. Woke capital must have sent the message this is what they want.

    • Replies: @Morton's toes
  13. Sure expand your horizons. Become woke! That’s why ESPN, SI and TV viewership of all the major sports is down.

  14. @Pincher Martin

    There’ve been loads of discussions on here about this, Mr. Martin. I would guess the consensus is that these big companies are not marketing to blacks but marketing to virtue-signaling white people. I would add that it’s also about not having the boot come down on them from Government agencies or the woke mafia.

    I’ve talked to great GoDaddy tech/billing people (they each do both) maybe 12 times or so. Only one or two did not sound like white guys, and of those 2 girls, one sounded Oriental. To see the people that GoDaddy says* are its great support people, go to their site or see the Peak Stupidity post “The People of GoDaddy”.

    .

    * I don’t maintain that the site completely lies and those people don’t work there doing support, but they are not at all representative.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  15. wren says:

    As noted elsewhere, this is an evergreen issue.

  16. The websites for my bank, my financial service company, and my HSA custodian, for example, all have black people on their front pages. No white men. No Asians. And no Hispanics. One interracial couple (black father and white mother with mixed-race child).

    It’s fascinating how quickly this kind of marketing saturated the entire market. Five years ago I don’t think a single minority was featured on these same websites.

    The problem is with NY based advertising companies. They are liberal bubbles and these corps write them checks with the assumption that they are experts.

    The marketing major has been completely watered down and is fully on board with the liberal agenda. In their minds they are changing the world by sticking Blacks or mixed race couples in breakfast cereal commercials. People that believe race doesn’t exist think we need to fix the world by constantly tweaking it and offsetting the influence of Bad Whites.

  17. It is just chit-chat. They have no intention of doing any such thing.

    Murdoch makes loads of money out of Fox News TV, Sky TV, and various tabloids worldwide, but he wants to keep a channel open to influence the kind of movers and shakers who do actually subscribe to the Wall Street Journal.

    Rupert (and his heirs) do not care if they make money out of the WSJ.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  18. @Achmed E. Newman

    I’ve got no argument about the stupidity you feature here, Steve, but this would not at all be a bad thing. The Wall Street Journal has been for open borders, as far as I know since 2000.

    They have been libertarian on borders and drugs for years.

    On guns they are centrist but as with liberals seem to think that “shall not be infringed” is just a suggestion.

    I think it would be great if they collapsed. Anything that undermines the libertarian cause is a win in my book.

  19. Mike Tre says:

    The end game is the South Africa model. One day soon Steve, the authorities are going to knock on your door with a family of negroes in tow, kindly asking you to leave the premises at gunpoint while the fam takes up residence.

    • Agree: Nicholas Stix
  20. Steve, that “Money printer” thing you’ve quoted a few times is one of the dumbest “memes” in history and you need to quit re-using it. Or, at least understand it before you use it again.

    https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/money-printer-go-brrr

    Short version: It is about the federal reserve, not anything relevant here. It’s the kind of shit idiots post on zerohedge. Feel free to delete this post, which isn’t intended for other readers.

    • Agree: ScarletNumber
    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  21. @Altai

    Never forget that the Washington Post hired a man to be a full-time TikTok maker…

    The Liberty Bell March and the Washington Post March should swap titles. The latter, or at least its namesake, is more likely to remind people of Monty Python!

  22. From the New York Times news section:

    Inside the Fight for the Future of The Wall Street Journal

    The NYT charges for its crossword puzzles. The WSJ and FT do not. There is probably a lesson in this.

    The Nation requires a full subscription after the first few, but is easy to copy in the library.

  23. George says:

    “The Journal of the future, they say, must pay more attention to social media trends and cover racial disparities in health care, for example, as aggressively as it pursues corporate mergers.”

    Sounds to me like they are saying WSJ should try to attract government not business readers.

  24. SFG says:
    @Polistra

    I’ve read the comments on WSJ articles. They are rarely woke at all, and often complain about wokeness, even on unrelated topics.

    I don’t see why the WSJ can’t specialize in hiring talented young conservatives with an interest in media? Looks good on the resume,…

    • Replies: @John Johnson
    , @Polistra
  25. SFG says:

    Read the article, it actually doesn’t look that bad–it’s not at all clear the woke lady (Louise Story) is getting any traction, and it looks like someone leaked it to the NYT because they were upset she wasn’t. Latour and Murray should put aside their differences and boot this lady or she will ruin both of them.

    Nobody’s pointed out the central conflict of interest here: the NYT wants the WSJ to do badly. They’re competition!

    • Agree: Verymuchalive
  26. Bill B. says:

    OT

    There is a “colorizer” who wants you to think the Khmer Rouge were kind of Teen Vogue.

    https://www.vice.com/en/article/y3dmpm/mugshots-people-arrested-by-khmer-rouge-cambodian-genocide

    The original Tuol Sleng prisoner photos are much different (all knew they would be killed). As this guy points out:

    • Replies: @photondancer
  27. Kronos says:
    @JohnnyWalker123

    “The Economist” and “The Financial Times” are the best mass media Neoliberal outlets.

    • Agree: JohnnyWalker123
    • Replies: @216
  28. @SFG

    I don’t see why the WSJ can’t specialize in hiring talented young conservatives with an interest in media? Looks good on the resume

    Because White people and especially wealthy libertarian New York Whites cannot give up their racial delusion. That would require re-questioning everything including their belief the free market is everything.

    In their minds hiring a bunch of (mostly White) young conservatives is a step backwards.

    We were supposed to be in a post-racial society by now because race doesn’t exist.

    Well dressed young Black men were supposed to be reading Rand and the WSJ while sipping non-fat lattes. This is really how libertarians and liberals think. Both groups believe race doesn’t exist and that (socialists or Rayciss Whites) must be keeping Blacks from becoming their true White selves.

    Instead we have Wet A** P***Y as a top song and revenue is declining across the board for all print media.

    All these mainstream media outlets deserve to burn in hell for denying reality and then pretending to report on it.

    • Agree: AceDeuce
    • Replies: @Forbes
  29. @Achmed E. Newman

    I agree, but GoDaddy is a tech company, and I’m not surprised to see tech companies doing this. Many of those companies were doing this long before the present wave of woke washed over us.

    Banks and giant mutual fund companies are much different beasts. They’re more conservative and even staid companies. Being fashionable isn’t supposed to be high on their list of to-do items. And until a few years ago, they weren’t.

    • Replies: @Redneck farmer
  30. anonymous[108] • Disclaimer says:

    Canceled my 15-year WSJ subscription in January. Creeping wokeism and refusal to question unprecedented election anomalies were too much. The “system” is corrupt and voting no longer matters, if it ever did. Anyone claiming otherwise is in on the con or drunk on KoolAid.

    • Replies: @Anon
  31. northeast says:

    The WSJ opinion page has been an open-borders/cheap labor /slave labor sanctuary for a very long time.

    They once proclaimed there should be a constitutional admendment that states: ‘There shall be open borders”. That’s the kind of sea of sickness that our elites swim in.

    • Agree: notsaying
  32. 216 says: • Website
    @Kronos

    The Economist is literally owned by Rothschild

    • Replies: @Kronos
  33. @Pincher Martin

    Their clients, a few noisy ones at least, have been demanding “better” from institutions that aren’t supposed to be fashionable.

  34. Polistra says:
    @Pincher Martin

    Mine have Asians sometimes. Generally in mixed relationships, of course.

    But yeah, about 90% African, though Chase has been a holdout.

    The USA is 90% African now, isn’t it? Certainly should be.

    Dirty little secret is that the financial institutions are not actually marketing to Africans. They’re signalling to GoodWhites.

  35. Polistra says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Thanks but definitely not original.

  36. Squid says:
    @JohnnyWalker123

    You have to be joking. The Economist is both superficial and sickeningly pozzed.

    • Agree: Forbes
  37. Polistra says:
    @SFG

    Yes, you’d think that the still-considerable market of non-wokies would merit some segment of the marketplace, but that’s not how the game is being played now. It’s Winner-Take-All and the other side is playing for blood.

    Besides, they’re terrified that alternate viewpoints might gain traction. They can’t have that, because deep down they know their own perspective is built upon one fabrication (or elision) after another.

    Incidentally, I did mean that the comments at the WSJ were largely contrary to wokish tendencies (particularly on the front page). WSJ readers by and large are intelligent and rational. God love ’em..

  38. Andy says:
    @Pincher Martin

    As a non-American I’m always surprised that so much effort and attention and so much news is concentrated on a group that is only 13% of the US population (a percentage that has been stable for decades)

  39. @JohnnyWalker123

    Sophisticated for whom? Global business douchebags? Your comment gives no hint of irony.

    • Agree: Not Raul
  40. Marty says:

    The racial disparities are that blacks get free gunshot surgery, and Spanish speakers get free childbirth, right?

  41. Anon7 says:

    Is it too late for Rupert Murdoch to transition to Rupina?

  42. @Jonathan Mason

    Hey, Jonathan, O/T, but do you know these people?

    Illegal Ecuadorian Parents Of Little Girls Dropped Over Wall Win The Scofflaw Lottery

    And here you and your wife had to pay a bunch of money and fill out a bunch of paperwork. You got screwed.

    .

    ;-}

    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason
  43. @John Johnson

    They are in no way Libertarian, John. If they were, the would actually understand Amendment II.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    , @John Johnson
  44. It noted that “in the past five years, we have had six quarters where we lost more subscribers than we gained,”

    In other words, in 14 of the last 20 quarters, we have gained more subscribers than we lost. I’m no math wiz, but that sounds pretty good to me.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    , @Lurker
  45. @Achmed E. Newman

    They are in no way Libertarian, John. If they were, the would actually understand Amendment II.

    “Amendment II”, as you call it, is in no way libertarian– check out section 4 of this Virginia statute:

    Militia refers to a duty , not to a right.

    • Replies: @Gary in Gramercy
  46. Simon says:

    I’ve been reading the Wall Street Journal for at least 20 years, and the schism between the news coverage and the poor embattled opinion pages — really just the final three pages of the first section — has grown more and more pronounced and more and more troubling. (As if to emphasize this, the news articles and many other features capitalize “Black” and lowercase “white,” while the opinion pages sensibly lowercase both.) It’s really like two different newspapers, and I wish there were a way I could subscribe to just the latter. Granted, the editorial policy is annoyingly pro-immigration (legal, at least), annoyingly scornful of Trump, and often more p.c. than anyone here would like. It is definitely not Unz. Still, it’s also not the Times, which is why I continue to read it. The weekend book review section is also quite good: lots of history books, especially World War II.

    • Replies: @Simon
  47. bjdubbs says:

    There was a journalist complaining about being paid less than Trader Joe workers so I wonder why these WSJ employees think they have leverage on WSJ leadership? There must be thousands of unemployed journalists in NYC who would be glad to take those jobs.

    • Agree: notsaying
    • Replies: @Muggles
  48. @Achmed E. Newman

    I am not personally acquainted with them.

    I am not sure that Derbyshire has got it right that they came from a place called Jaboncillo. Jabón is the Spanish word for soap and Jaboncillo is the name of a tree that can be used in place of detergent.

    There is a pretty detailed article on the whole subject in El Universo (you might have to use the Spanish translation in Google Chrome browser to read it.)

    This article explains that in the area of the city of Ambato, in a district called Ambatillo, a lot of people (around 250) have been leaving recently and going to the United States, because of unemployment in the area, partially caused by Covid-19 affecting their usual sources of income in agriculture, arts and crafts, and masonry.

    Apparently people are deceived by traffickers (coyotes) who paint a rosy picture of life in the United States and minimize the dangers of the journey and offer family ‘ combo’ trips for about $10,000 on credit. What could possibly go wrong, you may ask.

    (I think these people are Indian tribespeople at a very basic educational level, but the article doesn’t quite make this clear.)

    The whole situation is terribly sad.

    https://www.eluniverso.com/noticias/ecuador/a-pesar-de-los-peligros-sigue-la-salida-de-migrantes-desde-comunidades-ambatenas-nota/

  49. @Achmed E. Newman

    They are in no way Libertarian, John. If they were, the would actually understand Amendment II.

    Open borders
    Soft on drugs
    Minimal government
    Globalism
    Race denial
    Wealth before public health

    Running centrist on guns doesn’t negate their overly libertarian slant. Might as well call it the Randian Times.

    New York Libertarians have always been weak on guns. A bunch of wealthy Manhattan wimps that just want to call the police when a scary negro tries to accost them on the way to their town car.

    • Replies: @Muggles
    , @Kronos
  50. Anonymous[366] • Disclaimer says:
    @Andy

    Some NYT article reecntly admitted they make up 25% or somor TV characters. Which adds to the
    misperception.

    • Replies: @Mycale
  51. @northeast

    The WSJ opinion page has been an open-borders/cheap labor /slave labor sanctuary for a very long time.

    This is true, of course, but on the other hand, the editorials do rip the Dems a new one on regular basis.

    I have no doubt the newsroom is full of millennial Ivy League wokesters, the vast majority of whom, no doubt, are Caucasian, but the opinion section manages to convey some sensible thinking from time to time.

    We’ll see how long that lasts, I guess.

  52. Anonymous[194] • Disclaimer says:

    “The No. 1 reason we lose subscribers is they die,” goes a joke shared by some Journal editors.

    Like the LA Times, the No. 1 reason they lose subscribers is because they’re replaced by third world immigration lottery winners who don’t give a sam fuck about the stock market, Jackie Kennedy saving Grand Central Station, or which Frank Lloyd Wright building is up for sale.

    It doesn’t matter if the issue an hispanic edition, as the LA Times became comically aware.

    Los Angeles Mexicans don’t give a sam fuck about the Ennis House, the director’s cut of Blade Runner, if Harrison Ford is retiring, or who Sean Young may have orally serviced while intoxicated.

    And with Biden’s help, that is why they will fail.

    • Agree: Ed
    • LOL: John Johnson
    • Replies: @Polistra
    , @John Johnson
  53. @Not Only Wrathful

    I’m going to start reminding the Potter-tards that Harry was as likely to be Slytherin as Gryffindor, as he was a parseltongue and the Sorting Hat stated he would have fit right in at Slytherin, plus Professor Snape, who loved Harry’s mother, was Slytherin, which would have made it natural for Harry, who looked like his mother and also loved her, would go there, and Snape would have been just as protective as Dumbledore of Harry. And he was a pampered spoiled jock once it was seen he was a whiz at Quiddich, making him just like the pampered spoiled Draco Malfoy, but for his sports abilities rather than his father’s position.

    So Harry was actually, deep down, a weaseling little snake rather than a heroic Gryffindorer, and only his snake-like writhing and pathetic begging under the Sorting Hat got him into Dumbledore’s house. Which is what I will start reminding them of.

    Trust me, though you may not know why, making such a statement will infuriate those SJWs. After all, these morons also think Hermione Granger is a heroic feminist hero rather than what she obviously was: an annoying know-it-all mousy girl who was a Mary Sue for the author.

    And now, for showing that I know all that Potter-tard lore, I will light myself on fire.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    , @Kronos
    , @vhrm
  54. Kyle says:
    @Polistra

    Speaking of the fall of Rome, here is a very interesting passage from the decline & fall. This is on page 33 in the pdf copy I am reading.

    The terror of the Roman arms added weight and dignity to the moderation of the emperors. They preserved peace by a constant preparation for war; and while justice regulated their conduct, they announced to the nations on their confines, that they were as little disposed to endure, as to offer an injury.

    “In the purer ages of the commonwealth, the use of arms was reserved for those ranks of citizens who had a country to love, a property to defend, and some share in enacting those laws, which it was their interest as well as duty to maintain. But in propor­tion as the public freedom was lost in extent of conquest, war was gradually improved into an art, and degraded into a trade. The legions themselves, even at the time when they were recruited in the most distant provinces, were supposed to consist of Roman citizens. That distinction was generally considered, either as a legal qualification or as a proper recompense for the soldier; but a more serious regard was paid to the essential merit of age, strength, and military stature. In all levies, a just preference was given to the climates of the North over those of the South: the race of men born to the exercise of arms was sought for in the country rather than in cities ; and it was very reasonably pre­sumed, that the hardy occupations of smiths, carpenters, and huntsmen, would supply more vigor and resolution than the sedentary trades which are employed in the service of luxury. After every qualification of property had been laid aside, the armies of the Roman emperors were still commanded, for the most part, by officers of liberal birth and education; but the common sol­diers, like the mercenary troops of modern Europe, were drawn from the meanest, and very frequently from the most profligate, of mankind.”

    • Thanks: Polistra
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
  55. Kronos says:
    @216

    It is, but it provides the best Neoliberal economic/political material. It’s their top shelf media organ in terms of attracting a high ability readership. I’ve become increasingly disillusioned with neoliberalism but they do possess better articles and writers compared to the NYT and dare I say Teen Vogue.

  56. notsaying says:

    I used to read the WSJ occasionally and read and leave comments. But they tightened up the paywall so much that I don’t think I have been able to read anything there for over three years at least now.

    I used to be amazed at the number of commenters who seemed to me, as someone who is not conservative or a Republican, living in another world than I was. I have a similar response to the various articles from complaining Woke but privileged minority writers that Steve Sailer features here. The WSJ people seemed to think that capitalism and small government could carry us all through life. I am not anti-capitalist per se but I do not believe in small government and would say life is more complicated than capitalism or libertarianism can account for or help us with.

    Having said all that, I think there are still enough WSJ readers willing to pay enough money to keep their paper and their point of view going for at least another 10 years. If I were the Murdochs, I would stick with their current readers for now. The complainers at the paper don’t say who else will pay.

    As the country overall continues to be less white, I foresee that the top 2-3% will continue to be mostly white. That is the WSJ’s audience. The reporters who want a diverse readership will have to leave — but who else will pay them? Daily journalism is dying because no one wants to pay.

  57. @William Foster

    “The glass is three-tenths empty! THREE-tenths, I tell you! THREE! Do you hear me?!?!?!?”

    (Those who believe that this means the glass is seven tenths full are white supremacists. Also, math is racist.)

  58. Kronos says:
    @Andy

    1) They’re highly concentrated in important urban areas (DC, Chicago, Baltimore, etc.) Thus blacks often sit on the most valuable property for development. Also, if they do move out people want to know where they’re being relocated to avoid getting diversified.

    2) Civil Rights legislation has provided them extra citizenship perks and protections.

    3) They constitute the IQ floor of US society.

    4) A substantial portion of the demographic is highly violent and dangerous.

    (Keep in mind these are mainly pre-BLM numbers.

    • Replies: @Andy
  59. @Kyle

    To be able to write like Gibbon …

    • Agree: New Dealer
    • Replies: @Dr. Krieger
    , @Abe
  60. @Barnard

    I watched the start. They had Elder and and Nicklaus and Player. Elder did not hit the customary tee shot. He is on oxygen and could barely stand up. Nicklaus is fat. Gary Player looks like he could run a 5K. He would have demolished Nicklaus in match play on Thursday. I’d wager 50-50 it would have been one of those humiliating 10 and 8’s.

  61. @R.G. Camara

    Wizard abilities are hereditary, right?

    • Replies: @R.G. Camara
  62. Kronos says:
    @R.G. Camara

    And now, for showing that I know all that Potter-tard lore, I will light myself on fire.

    Oh! Oh! Use a fire spell!

    • LOL: HammerJack
  63. Anon[175] • Disclaimer says:

    No, it’s in favor of the Great Replacement, which means the NYT is good.

    Call it “White Replacement” or “White Dispossession.” Don’t call it “Great”.

    I thought you came from a marketing background! Yeesh.

  64. Anon[175] • Disclaimer says:
    @anonymous

    Canceled my 15-year WSJ subscription in January. Creeping wokeism

    Whenever I have come across a WSJ article on current events these days, I have been shocked at how anti-White (“woke”) it is. Has it always been this way?

  65. Polistra says:
    @Anonymous

    Now see Ben? There’s your vibe right there.

  66. @John Johnson

    Libertarians have been pretty useless in the culture wars ( among other things ) it’s true, but hey it’s a media outlet that hasn’t been turned into a politically correct college newspaper run by leftist morons yet ( Like, I don’t know, the New York Times or Washington Post ) that at least is something. So the last non-leftist newspaper with nationwide reach should stay non-PC.

  67. @Reg Cæsar

    Bet they had “stop and frisk.”

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  68. black sea says:

    But at a time when the U.S. population is growing more racially diverse, older white men still make up the largest chunk of its readership, with retirees a close second.

    Well, “older” white men and retirees are most likely to be in a position to have investments. 28-year old baristas and and aspiring musicians aren’t. In recent years, the Times has increased its digital circulation, but its ad revenues have fallen, so it’s not like they’re in a great position to face the future either.

    Reading newspapers in the years to come will probably be a niche activity, with newspapers becoming more like trade journals or hobbyist-publications.

    As things stand now, the majority of Times’ readers are white university graduates, not a demographic that’s likely to increase. It’s difficult for me to imagine an America in which a blend of Indian computer techies, Somali cab drivers, Guatemalan office cleaners, and Chinese small business owners became faithful subscribers to the New York Times.

  69. @Gary in Gramercy

    Bet they had “stop and frisk.”

    Hell, they had warrant-free raids of homes. That was explicit in some of these laws.

  70. vhrm says:
    @R.G. Camara

    a) you say “annoying know-it-all mousy girl” as if it’s a bad thing! An outwardly know-it-all, but actually nice, first in class (and Emma Watson looking ) girl is something to aspire for!

    b) Check out “Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality” (hpmor.com ) if you haven’t already.

    It’s an alternate universe HP fan fic by the main lesswrong guy (Eliezer Yudkowsky) that recasts Harry as a very high IQ precocious nerdy rationalist who brings his powers to bear on trying to understand the wizarding world when he is introduced to it. It’s a quite different take on the main characters (though Ron and Hagrid are mostly sidelined) and actually i guess Hermione doesn’t change much.

    It’s quite good i think, though it’s a fairly dense and didactic in parts.

    • Replies: @Herp McDerp
  71. @Altai

    That’s true and it’s a good point. Still, this guy isn’t too bad as Tik-Tok content creators go. If the fuddy-duddy wokocracy at WaPo want to appear hip and cool, this is about as close as they’ll get.

    Tik-Toks may not be “news”, but the stuff the WaPo publishes as “news” isn’t usually news either, and at least the Tik-Toks are sometimes amusing, whereas their “news” is tedious, leaden and dishonest.

    And most surprisingly, even though you might expect a throwaway positions like “Corporate Tik-Tok Creator” to b a diversity hire, most of the news staff are diversity hires while the Tik-Tokker is a rare white male.

    In short, just as the cardboard cereal box is said to be more nutritious than the corn flakes within, WaPo‘s frivolous Tik-Toks may be more informative than their so-called “news” product.

  72. @Andy

    a group that is only 13% of the US population (a percentage that has been stable for decades)

    As I have to point out here continually, the percentage is not stable. It has been going up steadily and relentlessly since the imposition of the welfare state in the 1930s, unfazed by mass immigration, birth control, abortions, etc.

    Formerly, in the period from Independence to 1930, the percentage had been going down steadily, even in the period when it was legal and profitable to import fresh Africans.

    • Replies: @AceDeuce
  73. EdwardM says:

    opinion department had published essays that did not meet standards applied to the reporting staff

    Very telling statement about, I guess, what they’re teaching in J-school these days. (Not just journalism school; it used to be that any educated and/or civic-minded and/or common-sensical person understood the difference between news and opinion.)

    Imagine, different standards for news pieces and opinion pieces! There is no difference in the NYT, and I guess that’s the model that all supposed journalists should emulate.

  74. sb says:
    @JohnnyWalker123

    This was true a couple of decades ago .
    The Economist has long been a very woke publication .
    The Economist is , however , still written for a higher IQ reader than Time etc and does still occasionally have some readable articles . For the time being

    It’s decline is a good example of Robert Conquest’s Second Law of Politics

    • Agree: Forbes
  75. Anon[199] • Disclaimer says:

    Slack is really bad news for any companya that adopts it.

    • Agree: Not Raul
  76. @sb

    That’s what I was thinking.

  77. Spud Boy says:

    “It’s like how the Masters golf tournament should have Cardi B perform on the 12th green between shots.”

    LOL.

  78. This is concern-trolling. These characters are throwing around the same talking points they always do, when they seek to destroy a White-dominated institution.

    Years after Steve showed (2000) that the GOP needed in-reach to its White base, if it wanted to win elections, the GOP Fifth Column and leftwing Democrats were insisting that the only way for the party to have a future was by screwing over its White base and reaching out to blacks, hispanics, and other people who hate it.

    It’s the wsj’s own fault, because it’s been hiring more and more racist, incompetent, affirmative action cases.

    • Agree: Mark G.
    • Replies: @Anonymous
  79. Spud Boy says:
    @Patrick in SC

    I’ve not been following the trial, but according to Scott Adams, Floyd’s death has been established as a homicide by both the prosecution and the defense. Homicide is not a crime however, so it remains to be seen if the charges of murder stick.

    • Replies: @anon
  80. @vhrm

    b) Check out “Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality” (hpmor.com ) if you haven’t already.

    Seconded!

    • Replies: @vhrm
  81. There’s no reason the WSJ can’t have a daily Bling section

    • Replies: @Not Raul
  82. @onetwothree

    Even if it has a dancing anime figure to give it diversité?

    Seriously, dude, there is no Chinese wall between the Fed and the US government … they are one in the same.

  83. JimB says:

    The movement to expand employment opportunities for otherwise unemployable black, Latino, and Asian Ivy League grads with degrees in Me, Myself, and I Studies continues apace.

  84. The best thing the WSJ could do to ensure its survival is to summarily fire every member of the “Newsroomies” slack channel.

  85. Odin says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    The Wall Street Journal has been for open borders, as far as I know since 2000.

    Quite true. And we can go even farther back.

    I read the WSJ assiduously back in the 1980s. I figured with all its prestige and money it must have put together the smartest editorial team around. So I followed its editorials with special care. In particular, I studied the endless stream of editorials arguing that there must be no constraints on immigration.

    But not a single one of its immigration editorials ever made an argument whose logic I could follow. And I pride myself on being not much dumber than average.

    I eventually figured if the geniuses at the WSJ couldn’t come up with a sound argument for unlimited immigration, I could safely assume no such argument existed. And thus began my journey away from libertarianism.

    True story.

  86. Anonymous[220] • Disclaimer says:

    Of course, people who know the factual truth, such as by paying a lot of money to subscribe to the WSJ, are likely to make even more money.

    I don’t know, Steve. I am not at all impressed by WSJ national news stories. They resemble those of the New York Times and Washington Post.

    • Replies: @Odin
  87. slumber_j says:
    @Kronos

    Not sure the WSJ has more subscribers, but the subscription sure does cost a lot. You may well be right though.

    What I’m fascinated by in the stupid thinking of the “special innovation team” is their blindness to why it is that the WSJ’s readership skews old. “Why might that be?,” one might ask oneself if one one were a special innovation teammate. Might it be that wealth itself skews old?

    Old people with money do die at an alarming rate, but then again they’re constantly replaced by more old people with money.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason
  88. Detrit says:

    Clearly there are those who have discovered that the wall street journal is the first one to stop clapping at Stalin’s, or should we say woke’s, speech

  89. @slumber_j

    Old-fashioned defined benefit retirement pensions hardly exist anymore and most people, or at least many people, have 401Ks or 403(b), IRA, or similar plans that invest most of their money in stocks, ETFs, and mutual funds.

    Once people are retired, or approaching retirement, they become even more interested in the performance of the stock market and probably in political policies that foster corporate profits.

    Trump seemed confused when he equated elevation of the DJII and the S&P 500 with a booming economy, but for a sizeable slice of the electorate, those are the only economic things that matter to them.

    I suppose the WSJ could go after younger readers by having more cartoons and puzzles and offering free crayons and Harry Potter dolls with an annual subscription.

    Perhaps they could get Daniel Radcliffe to do TV commercials. “We make money the old-fashioned way–like magic!”

    Interestingly I was reading an article just today that suggested that substantial growth in the stock market may be very hard to come by in the next few decades, so it might be a good time to look for dividend payers like AT& T. (Vaccine makers are already very expensive.)

  90. This reminds me of what happened to the L.A. Times beginning around the mid-1980s.

    The paper’s management decided that there were not enough women reading the paper. So first, their hard news coverage changed from “a robbery occurred at 123 Main St. at approximately…” style to “so and so knew something was wrong when she…” Then, the business and finance news, which was previously incorporated into the same section as sports, was given its own section. I mean, everybody knows that men are interested in all 3, and women not so much but for god’s sake you can’t say that.

    Metropolitan newspapers used to be read mainly by middle aged, English speaking (white) men, but even 30 years ago they were hopelessly uncool. When those readers objected to the changes, the papers’ owners shouted, figuratively speaking, “f**k you, we don’t want you reading our paper anyway!”

    Today, the L.A. Times is not much more than a boutique newsletter that caters to the sensibilities of a readership that resides in an area roughly bounded by Ventura Blvd. to the north, Topanga Canyon Blvd. to the west, La Brea Avenue to the east, and Santa Monica Blvd. to the south. It loses buckets of money year in year, and will undoubtedly be sold to some other billionaire as soon as its current owner can find a chump, er I mean investor.

  91. Forbes says:
    @Polistra

    I dropped my subscription 2 or 3 years ago because it had become the NYT–or close to it. The reason to subscribe to the WSJ is the business and financial news–not lifestyle, pop culture, sports, and social media. I also dropped it because at $43 per month it was no longer a value proposition.

    It was becoming woke before the term was in wide circulation. No thanks.

  92. Forbes says:
    @Pop Warner

    Murdoch acquired the WSJ so he could compete with the NYT as a national newspaper–and then the newspaper became the NYT, except for the op-eds. (But then the op-eds were famously NeverTrump, elitist and pro-Deep State, so no real difference.)

  93. @Anonymous

    Like the LA Times, the No. 1 reason they lose subscribers is because they’re replaced by third world immigration lottery winners who don’t give a sam fuck about the stock market, Jackie Kennedy saving Grand Central Station, or which Frank Lloyd Wright building is up for sale.

    I also suspect that there are a lot of under 50 Whites that don’t see the point of subscribing to a newspaper that constantly tries to blame them for liberal failures. You can get free news online so why pay extra for liberal BS?

    I only see retired White men putting up with that crap. They want their daily paper and don’t seem to care if there is a story about how racist and evil they are. A good morning FU that I guess has nostalgia for them.

    Print media is truly an industry ran by morons. They constantly insult their subscriber class and then fret about losing sales. They bet on race not existing and it obviously isn’t paying off. Amusingly they keep doubling down with more stories about how Bad Whites hold everyone back and I guess prevent Blacks and Hispanics from buying newspapers.

  94. Forbes says:
    @John Johnson

    Whites have a racial delusion.
    Society was supposed to be post-racial as race doesn’t exist.
    Everyone is racist.

    Got it.

  95. Mycale says:
    @Anonymous

    It might be 25% of the TV characters, but 50%-75% of advertising, if recent ones are any indication. Virtually every single nuclear family shown on TV these days is black, often living in a giant house in the suburbs, and loading up their SUV to partake in activities that are popular with blacks like camping, skiing, remote wilderness hikes, and exploring untouched beaches. Sometimes even the grandparents come along. You see a lot of these ads in typical middlebrow entertainment like pro and amateur sports, one wonders who they are trying to sell to.

    Anyway, the NYT calling out the WSJ here is quite strange. In a functioning system of political discourse, there would naturally be a market for somewhat staid, old-fashioned financial reporting, because a lot of people who care about business want this. Why would the WSJ start talking about “racial disparities in health care” when literally every other news organization moans about it constantly? Why would a single wokester transition from the places they normally get their news (twitter) to the WSJ? But this is evidently a good and reasonable point of view for the totalitarians on the left.

  96. One of the underrated aspects of the WSJ is just how non-American it is. Publisher is an Aussie. Editor in chief was a Brit until 2018.. Lots of Canadians in various editorial worker bee positions, writing loaded headlines, curating copy. (I used to know some of them) This has an impact on editorial coverage. NATO is good, a robust interventionist America is good for “world order,” immigration is wonderful, MAGA is a toxic ideology. These people despise Americans, but love an America that they can use and dispose of like a Kleenex.

  97. Marie H says:

    My husband subscribes to the WSJ and Economist. He and I like reading a daily paper (not digital) and a weekly news magazine. We fit the WSJ profile reader. We are white, well educated, retired, and financially well off.

    I concur with most of the comments posted. Besides the news and opinions, I like doing the crosswords and reading the weekly book reviews. I noted with amusement that when Seuss was blacklisted, two of his books were on the digital best seller list for a number of weeks. I have noticed more “human interest” stories in the WSJ during this past Covid year. Many of them cover POC. I ignore them.

    I like the Economist for the quality of the writing and the in depth coverage of topics that are not routinely covered in other publications.

  98. Lurker says:
    @William Foster

    True but they can gain one subscriber per quarter 14 times and lose a hundred for 6 quarters.

  99. Dube says:

    Old joke. The Wall Street Journal is read by the people who run the country. The New York Times is read by people who think that they run the country. The Washington Post is read by people who would like to run the country. The Los Angeles Times is read by people who would be willing to run the country if they had the time.

    And now what?

  100. usNthem says:

    Hah! CardiB twerking on the 12th. Gary McCord got canned from the masters for saying something along the lines of, the greens are so slick it’s like they were bikini waxed.

  101. WSJ subscriptions went down in 6 out of 20 quarters? In todays news market, shouldn’t the distinctive criterion be that they have subscribers?

    The Economist is like the World Socialist Web Site: good news and analysis, just ignore the ideology.

    • Agree: photondancer
  102. anon[380] • Disclaimer says:
    @Spud Boy

    I’ve not been following the trial, but according to Scott Adams, Floyd’s death has been established as a homicide by both the prosecution and the defense.

    Maybe…for some definition of “homicide”. The alleged drug dealer who was in the car with Floyd, who likely sold some pills to Floyd, flatly refuses to testify at all. If brought into court he will plead the 5th and that’s it. Did Adams mention Mr. Hill at all?

    Anyone who is “following the trial” via the MSM is sitting in a cave looking at shadows on the wall.

  103. Anonymous[171] • Disclaimer says:
    @Nicholas Stix

    Who keeps telling Republican leaders that the path to power is crapping on their voters while pandering to people who will never vote for them? Fools or saboteurs.

    George W. Bush did this. But so did Trump, who was supposed to know better.

    • Replies: @Kronos
  104. WSJ more like Teen Vogue? Do we REALLY need another publication advising and encouraging youngsters on the joys of anal fisting?

  105. Anonymous[302] • Disclaimer says:
    @John Johnson

    WSJ edit page hasn’t ever in my memory pushed drug legalization. They certainly didn’t when it was dominated by Bill Bennett-type neoconservatives, probably still their line today. They did print in 2018 a pro-Mary Jane op-ed by rock-ribbed conservative icon John Boehner, however, they run anti-pot and anti-vape op-eds too. Most national dailies don’t dare because Cheech and Chong’s Ivy League heirs have “counter-racialized” weed use, somehow. i.e. it used to be associated negatively w/ Negro jazz musicians, 100 years ago, therefore now is a 100% right-thinking moral aspiration.

    If you meant the reporters on the “news side,” then of course they are all legalize-it liberals, out of professional herd conformity if nothing else.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  106. Abe says:
    @Steve Sailer

    To be able to write like Gibbon …

    Churchill was a worthy successor to Gibbon, and as a stylist very-very-very near his equal (all the while being a primary participant in his own histories, having found time to, in no particular order- convert the British Navy to oil, found British Petroleum, mastermind the Gallipoli fiasco, help win the first Battle of the Atlantic, kiss a girl, win the second Battle of the Atlantic, godfather the tank, unleash the vampire Cristabel Pankhurst on striking munitions workers, etc, etc.)

    Churchill’s Gibbonian style seemed like an annoying affectation when I first came across it, but its effortless insertion into the sweeping historical dramas which Churchill witnessed, both triumphed and failed in, and then lived to write of, is, well, wonderful. Of course he’s no black child of a single mother like Obama, so I fully understand the banishing in 2009 of his bust from the White House.

    Below is a particularly magisterial example from the conclusion of his WWI history, touching upon the “stab-in-the-back” grumblings loud enough by then (yet still before the rise of Hitler, I think) to cross the North Atlantic and trouble English years. The beauty of the passage, the sagacity of its warning, and the fact that all this came from the pen of one who was to play a primary role in the disaster which was to unfold is- in combination- nothing short of, well, spine-chilling.

    [MORE]

    “It will certainly not fall to this generation to pronounce the final verdict upon the Great War. The German people are worthy of better explanations than the shallow tale that they were undermined by enemy propaganda. If the propaganda was effective, it was because it awoke an echo in German hearts, and stirred misgivings which from the beginning had dwelt there. Thus when four years of blockade and battle against superior numbers and resources had sapped the vitality of the German people, the rebellious whispers of conscience became the proclaimed opinion of millions. Yet in the sphere of force, human records contain no manifestation like the eruption of the German volcano. For four years Germany fought and defied the five continents of the world by land and sea and air. The German Armies upheld her tottering confederates, intervened in every theatre with success, stood everywhere on conquered territory, and inflicted on their enemies more than twice the bloodshed they suffered themselves. To break their strength and science and curb their fury, it was necessary to bring all the greatest nations of mankind into the field against them. Overwhelming populations, unlimited resources, measureless sacrifice, the Sea Blockade, could not prevail for fifty months. Small states were trampled down in the struggle; a mighty Empire was battered into unrecognizable fragments; and nearly twenty million men perished or shed their blood before the sword was wrested from that terrible hand. Surely, Germans, for history it is enough!”

    • Replies: @Nicholas Stix
  107. Muggles says:
    @bjdubbs

    You make an excellent point here.

    What is puzzling to me about this, and other similar “reports” which are mentioned of other supposed “media newsrooms” is why the management here cares one whit about what these woke commies have to say about their policies

    Since when do the average employees dictate what the owners/managers do in their business?

    I have worked in many places as a “grunt” and don’t recall any bottom level demands being made, much less heeded.

    I say fire anyone who signs a Woke Petition about say, inclusion. Made it clear that they are to do their assigned tasks, one of which isn’t to tell the editorial leadership what to think politically or even culturally. What is this nowadays, management by grade school girls cliques?

  108. Muggles says:
    @John Johnson

    New York Libertarians have always been weak on guns. A bunch of wealthy Manhattan wimps that just want to call the police when a scary negro tries to accost them on the way to their town car.

    So tell us Mr. Johnson, which well armed militia do you roll with when patrolling the mean streets of Harlem in your SUV protecting the citizens from uh, dusky criminals?

    Or don’t you recruit online for new members?

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  109. @Steve Sailer

    IIRC, J.K. Rowling makes the wizard ability a recessive gene, like red hair. So two non-wizards can have a wizard child if they both carry the recessive wizard gene, which is what occurred with Hermione, which is also why she’s called the insult “mudblood.”

    Most wizards are born of two wizard parents. Harry, of course, was the scion of two illustrious wizards. Because lefties hate hereditary titles until they plan for their baby daddy, and then its all about the family history.

    Occasionally in the Harry Potter world there are also children of two wizards who don’t carry the gene and therefore have no magical abilities. I don’t recall if this a mutation or just Rowling ignoring recessive gene theory to make the wizarding world more interesting.

    Again, fire, light, me, on.

  110. @Bill B.

    That’s utterly reprehensible. I already never click on Vice but I intend to spread this so others know to avoid them too.

  111. @Anonymous

    WSJ edit page hasn’t ever in my memory pushed drug legalization.

    Well here you go
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB124061360462654683

    Blaming Mexican gang violence on US drug use is very libertarian.

    If you meant the reporters on the “news side,” then of course they are all legalize-it liberals, out of professional herd conformity if nothing else.

    Yes and the editors choose to let them insert their opinions in what should be news stories.

    I don’t care if they want to be a libertarian outlet. I consider the libertarian ideology to be so irrational to where it will eventually defeat itself.

    It’s a free country so if they want to promote the Alisa Rosenbaum cult then they are free to do so just as I am free to point out how it is a really dumb idea to import third worlders and hand them machine guns.

  112. @Muggles

    New York Libertarians have always been weak on guns. A bunch of wealthy Manhattan wimps that just want to call the police when a scary negro tries to accost them on the way to their town car.

    So tell us Mr. Johnson, which well armed militia do you roll with when patrolling the mean streets of Harlem in your SUV protecting the citizens from uh, dusky criminals?

    Or don’t you recruit online for new members?

    I don’t live in New York. Too many people and the Whites are hopelessly deluded.

  113. vhrm says:
    @Herp McDerp

    Yesterday i followed some links from Yudkowsky site and landed upon a guide to Bayes’ Theorem at
    https://arbital.com/p/61b/?startPath
    It’s a pretty good basic guide afaict and i recommend it. (1) (2)

    Anyhow, on one of the pages it uses this illustration which will look familiar:

    “Suppose the Dark Mark is certain to continue while the Dark Lord’s sentience lives on, but a priori we’d only have guessed a twenty percent chance of the Dark Mark continuing to exist after the Dark Lord dies. Then the observation, “The Dark Mark has not faded” is five times as likely to occur in worlds where the Dark Lord is alive as in worlds where the Dark Lord is dead. Is that really commensurate with the prior improbability of immortality? Let’s say the prior odds were a hundred-to-one against the Dark Lord surviving. If a hypothesis is a hundred times as likely to be false versus true, and then you see evidence five times more likely if the hypothesis is true versus false, you should update to believing the hypothesis is twenty times as likely to be false as true.”

    1) it appears that arbital was some new wiki / blogging / collaboration software that he hired some people to build a few years back though it seems somewhat dormant now.

    2) Yudkowsky is at least a little bit weird and i don’t know enough about him to judge his true signal-to-noise ratio in general or for any specific purpose, but what i’ve read of his so far is at least moderately compelling. An external interview with him
    https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/ai-visionary-eliezer-yudkowsky-on-the-singularity-bayesian-brains-and-closet-goblins/

  114. @sb

    Yeah, I remember they wrote an article sometime in 2015-16 I think expressing complete bewilderment as to why black students in South Africa did far worse then European and Asian students in school.

    It was unintentionally very funny, I think they ended blaming the teachers unions, much like American libertarians would have a generation earlier. That may have been the last time I read the Economist.

  115. Kronos says:
    @John Johnson

    Eek! Why don’t the follow the non-aggression principle?!”

  116. Kronos says:
    @Anonymous

    The donors. Also, those voters who are addicted to slave labor.

    • Agree: Not Raul
  117. Not Raul says:
    @The Alarmist

    Don’t they have that already?

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  118. NickG says:
    @JohnnyWalker123

    The Economist subscribes to many of the fashionable woke bromides, it has been largely bilge for years.

  119. @Not Raul

    WSJ has White-folk bling all the time. They need to cover things like grills ‘n shizzle. Maybe where to get the best butt-lift, or new twerk moves.

  120. Spect3r says:
    @Pop Warner

    How are NYT and WSJ competitors?
    Their audiences/subscriber target is completely different.

  121. Jiminy says:

    If the journal does becomes totally woke, would it still be allowable or acceptable to print copy using black ink on white paper. At the moment it’s as if the black ink is a slave both to the demands of journalists and the newsprint.
    Here in the small towns and cities across the country the printing presses have been winding down, with interests in providing news for the locals at an all time low. Costs and dwindling readership are often quoted as the reason. So in response the locals are printing their own weekly rags, which are popular. Now the latest is they won’t even send their papers out to the little outback towns. Costs. They have been unceremoniously dumped. And yet in the past the big sharks swallowed up all of the varied mastheads, they had to have control over them until Murdoch had something like 70% print media ownership.
    So to hear that the WSJ no longer wants to cater to its paying readership isn’t really strange behaviour or unexpected. Would you think things to be different when taking into account the political and social atmosphere there in the US.

  122. Simon says:
    @Simon

    P.S. If you need an example of the Wall Street Journal’s increasing wokeness, check out the story on today’s front page, “Fear of Covid-19 Shrinks Labor Force” (April 12).

    I wish I knew how to upload the huge accompanying photo on the jump page — two women clutching each other on their living room couch — but I don’t.

    Suffice it to say that, of all the people in America that the Journal might have used to illustrate the story, it chose a married black lesbian couple outside Dallas.

    Talk about shoving it in the reader’s face.

  123. Odin says:
    @Anonymous

    I don’t know, Steve. I am not at all impressed by WSJ national news stories. They resemble those of the New York Times and Washington Post.

    Interesting point. The WSJ always had a structural split between opinion and news (“church” and “state”). Separate organizations, coming together at the publisher.

    I read the WSJ decades ago. To me the news side seemed pretty left-lib even back then, while the op-ed side could be quite sound on occasion (if you didn’t count the open-borders pieces).

    Mrs. Odin stuck it out long after I quit. But her recent reports were that news side’s leftward trend was accelerating; and that after the election, the op-ed side lost its grip on reality. She canceled earlier this year.

    OK, so possibly our household isn’t in the WSJ’s target market. But if Ms. Story is keeping track, we can report that more coverage of climate change wouldn’t have helped.

  124. Anonymous[171] • Disclaimer says:

    I used to post a lot on the Economist website before they suddenly disabled comments in 2018. As far as I’m aware, no warning or explanation was given for this.

  125. @Abe

    That is some soaring prose, evoking the grand alliance that was required to take down Napoleon.

    And then the revanchist excess of Versailles guaranteed the next Great War.

    Thank you.

  126. I used to post a lot on the Economist website before they suddenly disabled comments in 2018. As far as I’m aware, no warning or explanation was given for this.

    Most of the establishment supporting outlets have ended comments. You can’t support the establishment and allow free thought. It just doesn’t work.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments are moderated by iSteve, at whim.


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
Becker update V1.3.2
The JFK Assassination and the 9/11 Attacks?