Murdoch's finally convinced enough Bancrofts to sell.

http://online.wsj.com/public/us

...Aaaaaand there goes the country's best newspaper. So, after the online-minded redesign and Murdoch's likely tampering with the company, where are conservatives supposed to get their news? Can anyone help me?

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by Crash Landon

Psh. I've worked for those guys. I'll pass.

Originally Posted by Dullenplain

Diversify your sources. Find several reputable publications, such as the Economist, National Review, Reason (as already mentioned), and so forth . . . and maybe throw in several blogs while you're at it, to get some more individually flavored punditry.

Oh, I subscribe to the 1st 2 (though I'm not a fan of weblogs). I'm talking about substantial, daily news sources, though, especially physical copies.

Originally Posted by Bradylama

In all seriousness, Andrew Sullivan is pretty cool beans.

See the 2nd sentence above. I mean, I have the Telegraph and Yomiuri Shimbun (and so on) in other countries, but I'm not going to get good stuff from the New York Times or Washington Post. All other sources concentrate too much on regional happenings, I think.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by Pangalin

I'm just a dumb liberal hippie, here, so can anyone explain to me how Rupert Murdoch can possibly make a newspaper less conservative-minded?

Everything the man touches goes absolutely paleolithic.

I wasn't actually implying that, though others have suggested that he make it more centrist and luxury-minded to grab some of the New 'york Times' marketshare.

I meant that he'll tamper with the brilliant reporting, too, ruining the best conservative-minded (or, as I'd argue, absolute best) newpaper in the nation. Many don't want to waste the subscription and premium content costs on agenda-driven advocacy journalism.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.