How robust is WSJ’s influence?

Picked up via , CJR: The Rupert Watch has an interesting quote regarding the that links into recent discussion over influence. 

The Journal‘s credibility is the reason that it is valuable. If its readers, especially its many investor-class Wall Street readers, start to sniff out that the news in the paper about, say, China, is not straight, that it smells of hidden agendas, they’ll move to The Financial Times faster than you can click a mouse. They want to make money and they want the straight story. If Murdoch follows his pattern of bending to power at the Journal, he’ll have to do it very slowly and very subtly. We’re all watching.

Here, the ability to provide a “straight story” is considered to be influential.  It adds value, creating a good reputation, and so enhancing its influence. 

But this, like beauty, , and could easily be lost.  Influence may be a difficult thing to evaluate – but without care its power is surely .  

As the found, when trust is gone, no-one listens and you have zero influence, even when you are right.

Published by

Heather Yaxley PhD

Dr. Heather Yaxley is passionate about sustainable careers, reflective practice and professional development. I am a rhizomatic educator, practitioner, consultant, academic and scholar. As a qualified academic, I teach the CIPR professional qualifications with PR Academy and have experience teaching at various Universities. I run the Motor Industry Public Affairs Association (MIPAA) and my own strategic consultancy. I was awarded by PhD researching Career Strategies in Public Relations by Bournemouth University in 2017. I'm a published author, with books, chapters and academic papers to my name.