The idiot box and the birdcage liner, Part 1: Death of a Newspaper?

As the country heats up on the approach to the official start of summer a week from tomorrow, things are heating up in the television and newspaper business.

Initially, I was going to do a multi-party story, with the likes of Dan Rather and Rupert Murdoch dominating the behind-the-scenes broadcast news as of late. But that would make for one helluva long article, so just like Guns n' Roses split "Use Your Illusion" into two albums, just like Quentin Tarantino split "Kill Bill" in two and just like his recent effort "Grindhouse" crapped out at the box office because he didn't and it was just too damned long (ever sit nonstop through a three-and-a-half-hour movie after downing a 64 oz. Pepsi from the snack counter?), this article will likewise be chopped up. Think of it as doubling your pleasure. Hang tight, the Dan Rather one is coming soon.

First things first. The big newspaper industry story as of late has been Murdoch's aggressive bid for Dow Jones, owner of the Wall Street Journal, among other papers and publications. Murdoch made an unsolicited offer of $5 billion dollars for the company, hoping to tie their business media prowess with the planned "FOX Business Channel" that will take to the airwaves later this year. Since News Corp.'s announcement, others have jumped into the pursuit of Dow Jones, including the owner of the Philadelphia newspapers and reportedly, even NBC.

Granted, the Wall Street Journal seems, on the surface, to be a conservative rag, which would appear to fit right in with Murdoch's other U.S. newspaper properties. But the neocon agit-prop is usually confined to the editorial pages (which seems to often be written at the high school level). The rest of the paper is top-notch, with some very strong in-depth reporting on all kinds of news stories. And the 35-member, three generation Bancroft family has done a remarkable job of keeping up these high standards (save for "Opinion Journal") in an era when most newspapers are scaling down and relying increasingly on wire reports and fewer local features. Overall, it's a decent conservative rag, with groudbreaking stories on the AIDS epidemic, the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, 1980s insider trading scandals and the Enron fiasco, among others. Too bad it's a bit bogged down by the aforementioned opinion pages.

Will a News Corp-controlled WSJ resemble screaming tabloids like the New York Post or trashy London rags like The Sun or News Of The World? Granted, it likely won't go that far. But this could signal the end of the Wall Street Journal's noted independence and unique style as it becomes a part of a megacorporation known for heavy consolidation. The bland, gray lady could get even blander, minus the substance and deep reporting. Dow Jones is much, much smaller in comparison, and has given its media properties much more leeway than the other mega media empires it competes with.

Now, some of the Bancrofts are a bit wary. They don't much care for the Post or FOX News Channel, which they feel are too politically slanted and are overly obsessed with celebrity gossip and crime stories. They fear what could become of their crown jewel. Some are starting to warm up to Murdoch, but with very strict stipulations. News Corp promises status quo at the Journal, but we've all heard that before, right?

In another sign that Murdoch is dead serious about his pursuit of Dow Jones is today's announcement by News Corp that they are selling off nine of their TV stations, all of which carry the FOX Network (the "American Idol" one, not the "American Idiot" one). These stations are in some pretty big markets, such as Denver, Cleveland, Milwaukee and St. Louis. What's notable is that these are also stand-alone FOX affiliates, meaning that they don't have sister UHF stations airing MyNetworkTV, a young, upstart sister network that nobody watches. Why they opted not to sell those stations is unknown, since the stuff on MyTV is even worse than any of the shit FOX ever put on the air in their early days. Yes, worse than "The Chevy Chase Show."

FOX doesn't have much to lose in selling these stations. It's a given that whoever buys them (and no, FOX isn't stupid enough to sell these to another network and get their stuff yanked off the air) will keep the FOX affiliation. In the industry, it's a well-known fact that station owners drool over being a FOX affiliate. Let's face it, FOX stations only have to clear 2-3 hours for network programming a day (outside of sports), as compared to 8-9 hours daily that ABC, CBS and NBC stations have to give up. That means much more local ad time the stations can sell (in addition to a shitload of courtroom shows). Throw in NFL games and "American Idol" and why would any station, from a business standpoint, give that up? So they're relatively safe there. And FOX does mandate some pretty hefty standards for their affiliates, so it's almost like they're company-owned. For viewers in affected markets, the main difference is a lack of shows that FOX forces on their owned-and-operated stations (like "Geraldo at Large") or those ugly ass logos those stations have been getting lately (made to resemble the "FOX Noise Channel" logo - shudder). Consider yourselves lucky.

Now, keep in mind, Murdoch rarely sells anything. And when he does, it's usually due to federal regulations in whatever country they own properties or in cases when their buying sprees rack up too much debt (i.e. the FOX Network startup). News Corp has succeeded partly due to shrewd business moves (the broadcast network was a massive success), but mostly due to the obscene amount of money thrown around. But this sale of assets means that News Corp is hell-bent on acquiring Dow Jones, whatever it takes. And that's quite scary. We shall see what happens.