WSJ

I subscribed to online version of The Wall Street Journal mainly because they do provide the best context with business and economic news, only The Economist does a better job regularly, which is why they're more expensive. It's not the best thing for investors if you're looking for market forecasts, there's Barron's or IBD for that.

This is splitting hairs, and I'm pretty sure the WSJ is considered right wing by most on the left anyway, but this is the sort of bias that is most easily detected. The bias in their stories is almost a non-issue, or atleast I'd like to think so. So, here's splitting hairs...


LET GO of the Elliot Spitzer story! notice how every other story has a time associated with it, the Elliot Spitzer story, which is atleast 12hrs old, does not. It's not even that important a story, except that it is the first time Elliot Spitzer, NY's attorney general, has proved fallible. More people reading about it, isn't going to change anything.