Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Former Wall St Journal Owners: 'We Wouldn't Have Sold If We Had Known'
Guardian (UK) ^ | July 13, 2011

Posted on 07/13/2011 9:46:31 PM PDT by Steelfish

Former Wall St Journal Owners: 'We Wouldn't Have Sold If We Had Known' Bancroft family members, who controlled Dow Jones & Company, say they would have resisted Murdoch bid in 2007

Richard Tofel, ProPublica 13 July 2011

A number of key members of the family that controlled the Wall Street Journal say they would not have agreed to sell the prestigious daily to Rupert Murdoch if they had been aware of News International's conduct in the phone-hacking scandal at the time of the deal.

"If I had known what I know now, I would have pushed harder against" the Murdoch bid, said Christopher Bancroft, a member of the family that controlled Dow Jones & Company, publishers of the Wall Street Journal.

Bancroft said the breadth of allegations now on the public record "would have been more problematic for me. I probably would have held out.'' He had sole voting control of a trust that represented 13% of Dow Jones shares in 2007 and served on the Dow Jones board.

Lisa Steele, another family member on the board, said "it would have been harder, if not impossible'' to have accepted Murdoch's bid had the facts been known. "It's complicated," she added, and "there were so many factors" in weighing a sale. But she said: "The ethics are clear to me – what's been revealed, from what I've read in the Journal, is terrible. It may even be criminal."

Elisabeth Goth Chelberg, a Bancroft family member not on the board who had long advocated change at Dow Jones, expressed similar sentiments. Asked if she would have favoured a sale to Murdoch in 2007 knowing what she now does, she said: "My answer is no."

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: murdoch

1 posted on 07/13/2011 9:46:33 PM PDT by Steelfish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

Heh, consider the source of this one.

2 posted on 07/13/2011 10:00:14 PM PDT by coydog (Time to feed the pigs!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish
The hacks at the Guardian must be loving this. I would advise people who live in glass houses to avoid rock throwing.
3 posted on 07/13/2011 10:00:58 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet (I'll raise $2million for Gov. Sarah Palin. What'll you do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

Yeah, right...

4 posted on 07/13/2011 10:05:47 PM PDT by Beaten Valve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

they took the money when they sold their interest... case closed.

5 posted on 07/13/2011 10:06:04 PM PDT by Trajan88 (
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish


Okay. I've got it now.

6 posted on 07/13/2011 10:24:58 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (Hey Barry! Compromise this!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

Just wait when this undermines Fox News and all their “contributers”/pundits get implicated.

Van Sustern, BO’R, Hannity are back pedaling like mad now.

But they are trapped between their own values and being loyal to Murdoch.

Hypocristy cometh forth.

7 posted on 07/13/2011 10:25:51 PM PDT by saltus (God's Will be done)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

Some idiots left the bluetooth password on their phones set to the defaults of 0000 or 1234.

Too stupid to deserve any privacy.

Always shut off bluetooth and set the passphrase to something obscure.

BTW...didn’t all the liberal rags stand up for those two in Florida a few years back when they recorded a senators cell phone call?

8 posted on 07/13/2011 11:12:36 PM PDT by Bobalu ( Palin: More woman than Michelle. More man than Barack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: saltus
Even per this hit-piece, Murdoch has not been implicated as knowing of or approving the News of the World's phone hacking.

Attacking him is like blaming shareholders in then CBS parent company Viacom for Dan Rather's memogate in '04.

This UK tabloid scandal is absolutely irrelevant to FOX, FoxNews, WSJ, London Times or Murdoch's other independent media operations.

9 posted on 07/14/2011 12:22:14 AM PDT by newzjunkey (If anyone needs to be "primaried" it's Lindsey Graham.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: coydog


10 posted on 07/14/2011 2:23:33 AM PDT by personalaccts (Is George W going to protect the border?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: personalaccts
I remember the sale, they got a look at a 40 million dollar legal bill either selling or not and they sold it to pay the legal bill.

The cost of outside advisers–including some of the biggest names in law–may have persuaded reluctant members of the Bancroft family to approve the sale of Dow Jones and the Wall Street Journal to Rupert Murdoch, CNBC is reporting.

Fees to legal and financial advisers could amount to at least $30 million, the Wall Street Journal (sub. req.) reports. Law firms providing counsel include Boston-based Hemenway & Barnes and Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz.

11 posted on 07/14/2011 3:57:56 AM PDT by scooby321
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson