New WSJ.com: Community, Comments, Color
I have yet to really play with the new WSJ.com, but it looks slicker than the old version.
The most significant change -- besides the colors and layout -- is the community side of it. You can now post comments on every single WSJ published story.
I am not sure how that will ramp up. Its going to be somewhat interesting to see how this ramps -- and what the NYT does.
Up til now, I gave the Times website the edge in terms of breadth and interaction. We will see if this brings the WSJ site up to the NYT in terms of depth of content and traffic.
Interesting . . .
>
Tuesday, September 16, 2008 | 09:00 AM | Permalink
| Comments (19)
| TrackBack (0)
add to de.li.cious | 
digg this! | 
add to technorati | 
email this post
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c52a953ef010534a7adce970b
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference New WSJ.com: Community, Comments, Color :
Comments
here's my conspiracy thought for the day. anyone think that paulson and bernanke or either of them are the "trojan horse" assassins of the modern capitalist economy. cultivated in their respective ivys in the 60's and 70's to slowly infiltrate the system and blow it up from within.
Posted by: erik | Sep 16, 2008 9:12:25 AM
http://blog.wired.com/business/2008/09/wsjs-new-look-i.html
Posted by: Fred | Sep 16, 2008 9:21:42 AM
ERIK,
THIS IS GOD. I'VE BEEN WATCHING YOU. YOU'VE MANAGED TO SEE THINGS THE OTHERS CANNOT. YOU ARE CORRECT, MY SON: PAULSON AND BERNANKE ARE TROJAN HORSES. YOU ARE WISE. NOW, BE STRONG! FOR THEY WILL PERSECUTE YOU FOR SPEAKING THIS TRUTH.
AND ONE MORE THING: MAKE SURE TO BUY LOTS OF AIG THIS MORNING. GO FORTH AND PURCHASE AND YOU WILL REAP THIS BOUNTIFUL HARVEST.
Posted by: Dan Duncan | Sep 16, 2008 9:35:18 AM
Distasteful to see uber-free market GOPer, Hank Greenberg, begging for Fed and gov't help.
Posted by: VennData | Sep 16, 2008 9:50:46 AM
the major problem with 'new WSJ' is Murdock now owns it.
BTW Paul Krugman was on Countdown last evening and said this...
Krugman: Phil Gramm would be ‘just the guy’ to lead us into a Great Depression.
Backgrounder: Gramm orchestrated the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act in 1999 which “destroyed the Depression-era barrier to the merger of stockbrokers, banks and insurance companies.” He also pushed the Commodity Futures Modernization Act in 2000, which made legal “the mortgage swaps distancing the originator of the loan from the ultimate collector.” The Nation writes that “those two acts effectively ended significant regulation of the financial community.”
Posted by: km4 | Sep 16, 2008 10:00:36 AM
...free markets..? where..? Hank is advocating common sense..the rating agencies should shut up for now..they were silent for the last 7 years..they are more responsible for this than any and all..including Greenspan..imo..
Posted by: brasil | Sep 16, 2008 10:01:48 AM
AIG CREDIT-DEFAULT SWAPS RISE TO RISES TO 55% UPFRONT: CMA
this won't help
Posted by: Stuart | Sep 16, 2008 10:02:12 AM
BR- You MUST.MUST,MUST put the Hank Greenberg interview with Maria on that just occurred on MSNBC. Hank is off his meds-you have to see this to believe it!! He said AIG is a "NATIONAL TREASURE". Sorry Hank, that was a movie. This guy is off his freakin rocker. It looks like a hostage video.
~~~
BR Its about to become buried treasure . . .
Posted by: Yuri O | Sep 16, 2008 10:03:13 AM
It is possible that BAC paid so much for MER to limit the lawsuits and limit the mass exodus of good people at MER (people leaving thinking that they "stole" their company). Here BAC looks good to MER employees, they saved them, (many owning MER stock ). They may have few desertions, keeping the company together.
Posted by: mw | Sep 16, 2008 10:03:52 AM
Don't like it. Smells, looks and reads like FOX news with the insight of USAToday. Sad.
Posted by: Jack | Sep 16, 2008 10:29:31 AM
@VennData: I actually muted Hank for fear that I was going to destroy my television out of anger.
Posted by: Jeff M. | Sep 16, 2008 10:33:25 AM
Just like Wall Street, the WSJ is just a shadow of its former self. Content is for kids and trading addicts, not serious pros.
Posted by: Albnyc | Sep 16, 2008 10:47:39 AM
I miss the famous look of the Wall Street Journal. The Times has retained its look as has the Washington Post. The WSJ online should look like the Wall Street Journal. It doesn't.
The look is not as important as the navigation and features of a site like wsj.com. Barry, you should take it as a compliment that sites like WSJ.com are more like blogs and interactive services like TBP and SA
Posted by: ardano | Sep 16, 2008 11:15:05 AM
They are just trying change it one bit at a time in hopes that the core demographic that made the paper what it is gets used to it and doesn't abandon them en masse.
Posted by: anon | Sep 16, 2008 11:58:15 AM
What if I prefer not to participate in any Murdoch community?
I only bought that fish and chip paper for a shorter while than I subscribed to Forbes. I miss Forbes, what happened? I'm rooting for your thesis that NYT should expand its news coverage, provide some ballast to the life style stories that are increasingly there.
What about Portfolio?
With news agglomerator and opinion blogs like yours and a couple of others where you can post comments, why try to be that current on every story in Fox News land?
I am pro-business. There was an excellent story in Fortune about J Crew recently, similar industry to what I participate in, that had me wanting to go down there right now and buy a vest. And I never wore a vest.
Posted by: christofay | Sep 16, 2008 12:58:22 PM
Erik, your theory of paulson and bernanke will probably be picked up. yes, you are right, they are Manchurian Candidate liberals. This is in line where recently Luskin said Kennedy and Clinton accomplishments were actually Republican, no matter that Kennedy lowered taxes before the tax cut fetish started.
Posted by: christofay | Sep 16, 2008 1:05:34 PM
the new wsj layout,
is following the murdoch views,
sensationalism versus knowledge,
so you have big pictures with flashing graphs
that play like shocking ads,you do not think or put in perspective,you react,
and that is exactly what murdoch wants.
And that is also why blog have futures,because people seek informations no cheerleading lights.
Fortunately ft.com is still alive.
Posted by: jojo | Sep 16, 2008 3:14:05 PM
"the major problem with 'new WSJ' is Murdock now owns it."
That's not a problem, it's a feature. It's amazing, looking through these comments, just how many people can't adapt to change.
As to the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, that passed the senate on a 90 to 8 vote. Biden (D) voted for it, McCain (R) did not. President Bill Clinton (D) signed it into law. You're whacking Gramm with the small end of the stick.
Posted by: Max | Sep 16, 2008 7:51:14 PM
Travel China with few bucks!!!
Welcome to Chinatour4U.com . Chinatour4U (BECIT) is a large-scale comprehensive tour operate in China. Over the past few years, our company has been offering comprehensive journey services for both business and leisure tourism. We are proud to be part of a team of Travel Experts that fully understand the value of a high quality tour at an unbeatable price. You can expect us to be there when you need us, with the up-to-date information and a personal commitment to help you.
http://www.chinatour4u.com/
Posted by: chinatour4u | Oct 24, 2008 5:30:39 AM
