WSJ Reporters Stop CNBC Appearances

[Coexist]

NEW YORK — A union representing reporters at The Wall Street Journal said Wednesday its members would stop making unpaid appearances on CNBC to protest the position of the Journal's parent company, Dow Jones & Co., in contract talks.

The sudden escalation of tensions occurred after only the second meeting between Dow Jones and the Independent Association of Publishers' Employees. Dow Jones has had difficult relations with the union in the past.

<snip>
Browning, who has worked at the paper for 27 years, said the company told union negotiators that they were unwilling to discuss any of the proposals made by the union.

"To go into a meeting and be told there's not a single proposal they're willing to discuss is a pretty nasty way to start negotiations," Browning said.

more...

[central scrutinizer]

1. WSJ is unionized?

Geez, who knew. Sounds antithetical to their big business uber alles mentality.

[Coexist]

2. it would seem, from the article, that the reporters are.

I found that very interesting, too.

[fasttense]

3. So these reporters tout the anti-Union message for

the WSJ all the while they have their own Union? Like homosexuals who support anti-gay civil liberties these reporters are despicable.

[emulatorloo]

4. It isnt the reporters. It is the Editorial writers that are the wingnuts

The WSJ are pretty damn good reporters who broke several stories around Plamegate, for example.

But the editorial pages are filled with mouth frothing wingnuts.

[fasttense]

5. Thanks for the clarification emulatorloo.

I get my info about the WSJ from my mother and she tends to leave out any "good info" during our weekly talks.

[AlCzervik]

6. the actual "News" section in the WSJ is good stuff, as the above said

it's the ed. staff that are blowholes.