The Wall Street Journal Bay Area Section Debut Looks a Lot like the New York Times Bay Area Section


​We'd like to award the Wall Street Journal's Bay Area section with an even slightly less enthusiastic response than we gave the New York Times. And here it is:


We have our reasons. 

At first, the the addition of Bay Area sections to the nation's most prominent national newspapers sounded pretty exciting. Talented, experienced reporters from the New York Times and Wall Street Journal would be penetrate our sad, sad news vacuum, rewarding their target market — educated, affluent readers — with graceful prose and well-reported stories.

Plenty of people (including this reporter) subscribed at special-offer rates.

Then the Times ran its debut Bay Area section, and as you may recall, it produced in Will Harper, managing editor of SF Weekly, the following reaction: “meh.” The section was short and the news stories weren't news to savvy locals. Still, the addition of sophisticated prefixes to names were enjoyable. Perhaps things would get better with time?

Now comes the Wall Street Journal Bay Area section, which appears to have peeped at its predecessor's section and essentially reproduced it, only with financial flair. (Know this, Wall Street Journal: you lost the “m” in “meh” for being a copycat). The Journal format is strikingly similar to Times' section, with a couple of newsy stories, one of which is  missing key information; a Q&A that probably took some reporter all of 20 minutes; and a couple of culture stories that aren't very new or interesting. 

Tags: , ,

Related Stories