A brief look at what the media is saying about itself:
- A columnist says getting slimed by Bill O’Reilly is a honor. I imagine it’s sorta like being called a Dorito-eating basement-dweller by PJS editorial page overlord Mike Bailey. Hat tip to Romenesko.
- AOL has decided it needs to run its news in a blog-style format. Jeff Jarvis says “BFD.” Also, Jarvis thinks the New York Times is right to raise its price to $1.25 a copy and I agree. Eventually, inevitably, newspapers will have to switch to online distribution as their main source of revenue. High single issue sales is one way to drive eyeballs to the much cheaper online product, thus raising ad revenues online.
- Rupert Murdoch has agreed to keep his dirty, filthy vulgarian hands off the pristine news pages of the Wall Street Journal, which will now almost certainly be sold to him. Anyone who thinks this will last more than a day, contact me, I’ve got some swell investments I’d like you to make. Considering how rabidly right-wing the WSJ’s editorial page is, I have to wonder why the owners were so concerned.
- Lest I forget, hundreds of people all across the country have been released from county jail after being locked up for violating the terms of their probation. Apparently, this is a shocking development. No link provided, just turn on the television or listen to the radio.
Tags: Bill O'Reilly, Jeff Jarvis, Paris Hilton, Rupert Murdoch, Wall Street Journal
Billy Dennis is a former reporter and editor at small daily and weekly newspapers in Illinois and Missouri. He comments on media, news and politics. He also owns and operates 
Geez! I had to check the byline to make sure Scotty the Hater didn't write that. "Rabidly right-wing"? I'm glad you never exagerate, Bill.
Murdoch buying the WSJ will be a sad day for journalism. Yes, its editorial page is right of center, but not the paper as a whole. And the Bancrofts must be extremely naive to believe they can keep Rupert's grubby hands from tilting everything in the newspaper. His entire career belies this. Would you sell a day-care center to a child molester just because he signed an agreement to be good and offered you a lot of money?
The reporters at the WSJ were embarrassed by the edit page Clinton bashing during his two terms. Bear in mind that I am no fan of the Clintons. As I recall, there were incidents of the edit page fact information directly contradicted by their news pages.
Sometimes, though I often disagreed with them, WSJ editorials would use actual logical arguments to back their points. This was pretty refreshing after listening to Sean Hannity. Sean might make a great editorial page editor for the latest raggus murdochus.