Claim: Wall Street Journal Page One Staff Dissolved
A tipster is telling us that the Wall Street Journal's fabled Page One staff will be dissolved into the news desk. Page One editor Mike Williams would become a "roving features editor," which sounds much less powerful. The Page One desk is responsible, among other things, for the often breezy but always well-researched A-Hed feature, which has been increasingly marginalized as the Journal's front page gets newsier. Its disbanding would mark only the latest move by new editor Robert Thomson to remake the Journal in the image of the Financial Times, Thomson's former employer and a favorite of ultimate Journal overlord Rupert Murdoch. In fact, the paper's old guard is said by our insider to be grumbling that recent FT-like stories, like the front page article on alleged flaws in the Libor benchmark lending rate, are shoving aside "stories that appeal beyond the circle of Murdoch's friends in the global elite." But not all veteran editors are suffering under a cluster of changes said to be coming down in the coming days.
Murdoch-friendly Money & Investing section chief Nik Deogun is said to be poised for promotion to deputy managing editor for foreign coverage. There is also speculation cold-hearted DC bureau chief John Bussey may get a promotion.
The full email from our tipster:
Watch for announcement today or soon that page one staff - what used
to be the backbone of the WSJ and its strong features - will be merged
with news desk and current editor Mike Williams will be roving feats
editor; that nik deogun will move up to run foreign and become a
deputy ME; bussey may get something big too. So the post-revolutionary
shakeout continues to be revolutionary. Lots of confusion and
uncertainty inside paper. Olf guard... bemused by three column lead stories about wachovia ceo's and Libor
studies and disappearance of stories that appeal beyond the circle of
murdoch's friends in the global elite
The Page One change, at least, would be perfectly in line with the newsy but less polished — and, arguably, far less analytic — direction Thomson is taking the paper. Can anyone shed more light on this rumored re-org? ryan@gawker.com