Covers a wide variety of interesting topics by interviewing the newspapers’ reporters, the majority of which are very smart and know their stuff with 4/5 episodes per week released almost daily Monday thru Friday. This, Wall Street Journal and New York Times are essential listening
If I wanted liberal biased opinion I would listen to the big networks. I listened from the beginning of these podcasts, but time to find a more credible source.
I have observed this production increasingly migrate to what sounds like a mouthpiece of mainstream narratives rather than balanced and holistic reporting. The Melinda Gates interview was a perfect example; extensive discussion about vaccine safety and the role of the FDA, yet not a single intelligent line of inquiry in response to the “misinformation” narrative (or acknowledgement of legislation passed in 1986 that essentially transfers all vaccine injury liability to the US taxpayer). Yet another example of shallow reporting, which I can subject myself to any number of on other mainstream media platforms.
Hide your bias much
... well apparently not anymore. When I started listening to this podcast I greatly enjoyed the stories and did not feel the were slanted toward one side or another. This has definitely changed and for that I am disappointed. There was a time when news reporting did not require a liberal bias.
Entertaining, Informative, and Unbiased Journalism
Love this show!
Listen everyday - but wish fact checking would be done at the end of the show.
Love this podcast but like most news shows I wish they would do some fact checking at the end of each show. I find myself talking to my radio wanting to know the real facts. For example, there was a recent podcast about a Black Rapper from Atlanta wanting to open a bank in the area to help lower income black communities especially. The female interviewer asked him if he thought the banking issues were socioeconomic/poor people or racial/black people and he didn't really have a true data/fact based answer. I wanted to know this and thought it was a perfect example of how they could end the show with fact checks.
I would expect WSJ to have a basic understanding of corporate debt
Why was Trump organizations debt refinance sensationalized as if it is any different from any corporate debt that only pays interest and the full principal due at maturity? You made it seem like they did something wrong structuring they debt that way - very disappointing. I am a credit research analyst and basically all of my companies’ debt is structured that way. I feel like you are hoping and therefore spinning a story that his debt can’t be refinanced - but sorry, if the asset value is there, there are willing investors.
Why Did That Women’s Husband Get Pulled Over?
We never got a reason. The heavily implication is that the only reason was because he’s black, so it seems like we should have gotten that confirmed along with the response by his department. That, or it was a legitimate reason and half of that episode is completely undercut.
These podcasts are getting farther and father away from facts
Consistently subjective opinions are used to emphasis a certain “view” instead of just facts. Sounds like MSNBC- I’m starting to lose faith in unbiased reporting here. Happened too many times lately and I’m unsubscribing.
This podcast started out pretty good and provided what I thought to be a glaring hole in the podcast arena (factual based, non biased news/business stories). But over the last couple months, it has evolved into just like every other mainstream podcast out there. No thanks
Usually good... Not today
This show is ordinarily excellent with solid reporting and a wide variety of topics. The show on October 13th about the Trump organization's real estate debt was simplistic and sensationalized. Loans on commercial real estate and operating properties are made and refinanced every day. They didn't tell us the value of the underlying collateral compared to the amount of the debt. The total amount of the loans is not large when considering the assets that secure the debt. This sounded more like something that MSNBC would produce, not the WSJ. Disappointing.
Activism not Journalism
Blame cuomo for everything
WSJ must have axe to grind with the NY governor. Now he’s caused the demise of movie theatres
Murdoch is wasting his money here
This leftist-leaning podcast sounds more like something the NYT would put out. Basically, it’s just garden variety Liberal talking points.
Voting by Mail.
The discussion on the Barrett confirmation was a good example of the lack of balance that has developed with these podcasts.
Definitely a slant to the hard left
I have been listening to this podcast for the last couple months. I am a Wall Street Journal subscriber. The one thing I noticed about this podcast is it leaves out half of the story every single time. For example on the story about Amy Conney Barrett they played Diane Feinstein’s statement about the dogma lives loudly in the nominee. However they missed the obvious which is that abortion (choice) is a dogmatic position for the Democrats. In fact it is much more of a dogma than any religious position. Hence 1/2 a story
Expected quality - very disappointed
I thought the WSJ would avoid the pitfalls of overt drama, bias, and cheesy production. I expected a factual and impartial presentation but this podcast is far from it. Look elsewhere for quality news reporting and presentation.
Love the in-depth reporting
It’s really well produced with great content. I look forward to it everyday.
Unapologetically poor journalism. See what I did there 🤔
TOO MUCH COVID!
This used to be my favorite podcast, but then Covid-19 hit and the entire podcast shifted. Every episode was Covid-19 related. It was the only thing worth reporting on apparently. I was okay with Covid-19 news for the first month, but then it took over the whole podcast. I'm here to listen to news not Covid-19 noise. Bring back The Journal!
My everyday news podcast
I never miss a show. Excellent balanced journalism.
Please stop modulating Kate’s voice
Sounds like the producer is adding a modulation effect to Kate’s voice which is very unnatural and distracting. Sounds almost robotic. Why is this necessary?
Not WSJ quality
Not WSJ quality
Enough with the Lounge Music
This is a solid podcast with great interviews and great interviewers covering a wide range of topics. My only complaint is the strange and often misplaced additions of “lounge” music that don’t add to the experience. WSJ we don’t need the vibe to consume the content.
Love him & trust him: no one surveyed me or the people I know!!
This one is really amazing! I’ve followed for sometime and nearly every topic attracts me a lot! I couldn’t wait to listen to it every time it comes out.
Has become very biased and sensational
Disappointed that a balanced view has been abandoned. I’ve had very few places to turn to when wanting to hear all three sides of the story. I will have to continue to look.
The Journal is an all-around solid podcast. Good production value and solid, substantive journalism. I don’t know why people are appalled by the liberal bias, as if this is surprising. Yes, the mainstream media has by-and-large been co-opted by the progressive left. But as long as you’re aware of that, you can enjoy this podcast for what it is. There’s a lot to learn, even from our ideological opposites. Having said that, I think the journal hosts do a good job reporting. The interviews seem to be edited in a way that fairly represents the people they’re interviewing.
Michael Scarn, Jr.
A shame that the journal has taken this leftward turn. Lots of information here but not all of it. If you are paying attention you can hear what’s not being told, important factors that tell another story purposely left out. Would be nice to have at least one unbiased, non-sensational, news outlet that provides facts and information without working to an agenda on important issues that affect our nation.
what, i need a nickname
This is a shame of a news outlet
Very emotional. The female also has a horrific voice and is selling ‘news’, as if she is an actor. C’mon!! You lost your place WSJ. You used to be good — remember report on facts — all of them and let us decide.
This podcast has turned very left; go to WSJ Potomac Watch for a more balances view
Been listening to this podcast on a daily basis for several months now. Have noticed it slowly turning more and more left, almost socialistic. Take the latest podcast 9/10 or 9/11 (the one on jobs not coming back). Interviews the single dad who used to make $20/hr prepping convention centers. During shut down he was receiving $1100/wk but now can’t make ends meet bc the extra $600 federal unemployment check has stopped. Ok how about the interviewer acknowledge that during the shut down he was making over $27/hr!!! ($1100 divided by 40 hours a week). So he made more money, not working, than he did prior to covid 19 shutdown. That was one of the reasons that the $600 federal unemployment check stopped (or rather, reduced to $300).
Tech and business stories are good but I’m no longer listening to any political or culturally related episodes. Are way too left biased. I always thought wall st journal was the most centrist media outlet out there today, giving both sides of the story, but I don’t see that in the podcasting.
This is the best podcast I’ve listened to so far. Unbiased, educational and eye-opening at times. Very high quality work!
Has recently become very biased.
You’re supposed to report the news not talk about your political opinions. Shame one of the last good news sources has fallen.
Biased, but still interesting
The politics covered in this podcast is every biased towards the left, but I must say it does a good job at using semantics to draw in listeners like me. I like to supplement this podcast with Potomac Watch because they mention all of the key facts that this show decides not to provide. For instance, in the Sept 3 show, they don’t mention that Kyle Rittenhouse was being chased down by other criminals/extremists and the journalist only mentioned that he shot 3 people. I enjoy the stories featuring big business and people living through today’s economy, but I know to take their episodes that weigh heavily on politics with a grain of salt.
I listened to two episodes and that’s all I needed to hear, one was about what a great guy George Floyd was and the other was blamed violence in the street since Floy’s death in the far right and maybe a little bit on Anyifa which is just factually wrong and continues to be so. I’m sure Floyd will be missed by his friends but I’m sure the pregnant woman he assaulted isn’t one of them. Can’t believe this is connected to the WSJ.
We need more stories like your latest
The “Nation Grappled...” episode is one of the best you have ever done. Please continue telling stories like this. Sharing the continued aftermath keeps the memory alive.
This was once a very good podcast. Over the past few months, every story has taken a very liberal lean in the way the stories are reported. Get back to an unbiased reporting and you will be fine. That’s what we expect from the WSJ.
Thanks for not “neutral-washing” moral issues
In an election year awash in a pandemic and discussions of system racism, a general shared theme is morality. People with different values and ethics, as well as different political beliefs, will paint a news org that takes a moral stance as “biased.” News organizations are allowed - an outraged in fact - to be ethical. Since the pandemic started, I’ve actually enjoyed this podcast more, as it delves into people’s moral positions on their values and ethics in a pandemic and election year. Other reviewers accusing The Journal of bias need to understand that interview subjects can have bias or take a stance on a controversial or complicated issue, and that doesn’t make the interviewer biased. Interviewers are doing their due diligence to interview a range of people from different moral, ethical, and political backgrounds on their opinions on various topics. You can’t paint their opinions as the opinions of journalists. WSJ is a conservative-leaning publication. The podcast is its own thing based on its own reporting. It doesn’t have to follow the same bias as the paper. Kate and Ryan - you’re doing a great job. You’re keeping us connected amid a divisive time to people we don’t agree with. And you’re doing so with empathy and a moral position to be honest, truthful, and unequivocating from ugly facts. I think it’s a shame some people find reporting with a sense of ethics as biased. Just know some of us see it as the responsible way to report.
Great podcast before 2020
Has become a very biased podcast, which has just completely ruined it for me, before it was a place to get neutral news but now it’s turned for the worse
Just far left narratives put forth as news the producers Inject leftist bigotry into the content whenever possible.
Do you need a slightly less woke version of news?
This was a good podcast until they decided that they needed to compete with the tragedy porn that The Daily pedals. Podcast vs written word. Two very different mediums and WSJ decided to use two very different approaches. I had to unsubscribe. It’s a shame. Maybe I’ll give it another try after the election.
This what good strait news made from facts until the coronavirus hit. They have slowly gotten more and more biased as time passed. I want to hear what has happened in the world not someone’s point of view on what happened.
Much more biased than the WSJ
Excellent for liberals where biased narrative & one sided reporting is their desire.
I used to follow this podcast as I appreciated the in-depth analysis and a neutral perspective on a broad range of issues . I loved the podcast about ventilators and the production chain collaborating with car part factories to produce them. Unfortunately, I have since found that the podcast is very biased against any issue that is part of the republican platform. The commentators speak in mocking views regarding Trump or anything associated with him. They are clearly trying to do their part like the rest of main stream media, and attempt to sway the public rather than report the facts. Very disappointing, I expected more.
Dr Branch & The Journal for the topic!! Thank you
Finally someone discussing Vaccines. How can anyone be confident in a vaccine in which the vaccine company takes Absolutely NO LIABILITY!! responsibility for damages to people and families goes to the taxpayers. This is insanity, America land of the free ? I beg to differ; it is severely censured & damaged hopefully not beyond repair. I find it difficult with all these corrupt systems in charge. These are human lives.. and is all about the $$$$ So very sad and pathetic. A doctor and companies rushing for that instead of taking such a risk on human lives. A treatment is a safer bet!! Put a few bucks towards that instead of a vaccine we couldn’t possibly know if it’s really safe for ANYONE many many years to come and making more billionaires. If doctors really care (and I know they do) there are treatments that can help so please push those and help people be healthy on earth!! God bless our world & our planet!!
Solid show and saying that Nicholas Sandman was seen arguing with a Native American man is not true unless you believe standing still when approached is arguing.
Your podcast has shifted too progressive and is contributing to the virtue signaling that I’m trying to stay clear of. Stick to the business news and stay out of politics.
In a recent episode regarding the post office the lead speaker/journalist states as a position of fact that until covid hit the postal service was generally functioning fine. That is the most untrue statement. USPS lost 8.8 billion dollars in 2019! This is a failing agency, and while it may need a cash infusion to handle the upcoming election, the idea that a major structural overhaul is not sorely needed is to be totally dishonest about the situation. You really can do better than that.
walt's future nemesis