[markpercival]

I cancelled my subscription a year ago because of this. It's really a shame too, as it was one of the best papers out there. The frontpage always had one really interesting article and the rest(barring the op-ed) was really solid reporting.

[waterlesscloud]

I think people are dramatically overstating the degree to which the WSJ has increased its political content. There's a slight swing, but I believe people's perceptions are exaggerated because of what they expect from Murdoch.

I also think it's rare to talk about economics in a way that's free of political bias. I think most of the time the bias is just subliminal, and people are more likely to notice on WSJ at the moment due to Murdoch.

The bigger problem for me with the WSJ is that it seems to include more and more "soft" economic news (lifestyle, human interest, etc) and less "hard" news. I don't have hard data on it, but it feels that way. Could be my own version of Murdoch awareness.

[matrix]

The reason I canceled my WSJ subscription had nothing to do with ideology. I used to read the WSJ for the in-depth stories about topics that aren't necessarily in the headlines right now or that are otherwise not especially mainstream. After the Murdoch acquisition, the WSJ has increasingly focused on shorter stories about more populist topics. I can get that anywhere, so I no longer have a reason to read the WSJ rather than any other paper out there. I'm sure many others feel the same way.