Rupert Murdoch takes New York

[CHIMO]

Put your ideological preferences aside. And never mind that the New York Times's coverage of its home city is almost certain to remain stronger than that of the Wall Street Journal's just-unveiled New York section. The reality is that Rupert Murdoch seems destined to come out ahead in what has been called "the last great newspaper war of the 20th century".

The key to understanding the stakes is to look at what executives at each paper are trying to accomplish.

At the Times, the goal is to hang on to the diminishing paid print circulation without necessarily worrying all that much about what else their customers might be reading.

Matters are quite different at Murdoch's Journal. There, the aim is to inflict as much damage on the Times as possible by getting New Yorkers who are already Journal subscribers to drop the Times and become one-newspaper customers.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/apr/26/rupert-murdoch-new-york-wall-street

[BrklynLiberal]

1. I would not put another penny into Murdoch's pocket if The Wall St Journal were the only newspaper

left in the world.

We know what happened when banks became "too big to fail". Just how much media does Murdoch have to control before the world realizes that it has become too much?

[Captain Hilts]

2. A huge percentage of folks read both. It's not really an either/or. nt