Wall Street Journal Only Top 25 Newspaper To Report Circulation Increase

  |   04/28/09 08:45 AM

I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Wsj

From the AP:

NEW YORK — Circulation at the nation's newspapers continues to fall.


The Audit Bureau of Circulations said Monday that average daily circulation declined 7.1 percent in the October-March period from the same six-month span in 2007-2008.


That was faster than the 4.6 percent fall recorded in the April-September period of 2008.


Sunday circulation fell 5.4 percent in the latest period.


USA Today remains the No. 1 newspaper, though its circulation dropped 7.5 percent after several periods with little change.


Newspaper sales have been declining since the early 1990s, but the drop has accelerated in recent years. Circulation revenue has largely held up, though, because of price increases.

Editor & Publisher publishes the top 25 list here, which shows that the Wall Street Journal was the only newspaper in the top 25 to report a circulation increase. Its increase was modest — 0.61% — but an increase nonetheless.

Below are the top 5 newspapers by circulation, with their percentage increases or declines from the same October-March six-month period in 2007-2008:

USA TODAY -- 2,113,725 - (-7.46%)
WALL STREET JOURNAL -- 2,082,189 -- 0.61%
NEW YORK TIMES -- 1,039,031 -- (-3.55%)
L.A. TIMES -- 723,181 -- (-6.55%)
WASHINGTON POST -- 665,383 -- (-1.16%)

Read the full top 25 list here.

From the AP: NEW YORK — Circulation at the nation's newspapers continues to fall. The Audit Bureau of Circulations said Monday that average daily circulation declined 7.1 percent in the Octo...
From the AP: NEW YORK — Circulation at the nation's newspapers continues to fall. The Audit Bureau of Circulations said Monday that average daily circulation declined 7.1 percent in the Octo...
Filed by Danny Shea
 
Comments
95
Pending Comments
0
View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »   (2 total)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dax49   10:43 AM on 4/28/2009
jusdt because they report it, don't make it so. newscorps isn't exactly famous for integrity
TaxDayMan   10:56 AM on 4/28/2009
Meaning Fox News people don't get "chills up thier leg" over Obama LIKE over at MSNBC?
photo
tomasedison   07:18 AM on 4/28/2009
The WSJ is a filthy right wing rag. The opinion and editorial pages are generated directly from the fools at FOX news. Typical Murdock rubbish.
TaxDayMan   08:03 AM on 4/28/2009
Of the "Top 10" cable news shows ALL belong to FOX News! And now News Corp's WSJ! Do I hear the sound of the "pressing of the SOUR GRAPES!
photo
Mauiboy   10:29 PM on 4/27/2009
I watched The Journal Editorial Report last weekend with Paul Gigot, and there could have been many topics related to the economy that they could have round tabled, but instead the two important topics were the interrogation prosecution(they opposed) and cyberspace attacks by hackers into govt computers(they fear mongered). This is why they can't be trusted anymore. Sometimes they use the WSJ platform to use as a source for FOX News reports, like it still has some credibility. How many publications and stations does Rupert have to purchase in America before he can convince the American public to buy into his world view???
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dax49   10:45 AM on 4/28/2009
why are the republicans and fox so terrified of any investigation- they seem to be obsessed and irrational on this topic- what are they so desperate to hide?
photo
HC4BO   10:28 PM on 4/27/2009
I did NOT know the THE USA Today was THAT circulated ...
Daniboy   09:53 PM on 4/27/2009
Good news for the Libs-the WSJ doing good because it is the most Lib paper on this list-proof the Liberalism is breaking out all over our country!
photo
HC4BO   10:28 PM on 4/27/2009
I could smell your snark from a mile away ...
photo
flossophy   05:06 AM on 4/28/2009
Classical Liberalism, sure.

Today's liberals are the true conservatives... bitter clingers to a fading ide0logy.
fuelrod   09:34 PM on 4/27/2009
It's only a matter of time before Obama bails out the times...

Then we will get honest reporting....
photo
flossophy   05:12 AM on 4/28/2009
New York Pravda Times
fuelrod   09:31 PM on 4/27/2009
I read the WSJ now the times has really lost it's credibility
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
UsofA   11:14 PM on 4/27/2009
Sure, the Murdoch owned Wall Street Journal, a once-proud newspaper, will give you all the semi-credible, reactionary Right news you need to go about your life as marginally informed, gullible human being.
photo
flossophy   05:11 AM on 4/28/2009
Well, what if people are noticing that the NYT has not been reliable in recent years? If your kid's college fund is invested in the market, why would you risk reading a biased paper?

News is a product. A designed product. News corporations choose what to publish and what not to publish. NYT simply chose the wrong things to cover, or was inaccurate with what they did choose to cover. Intelligent people notice this.

Murdoch understands this. The legacy media does not... which is why they're falling apart.
TaxDayMan   02:28 PM on 4/28/2009
Unlike the "semi-crediable, reactionary Left news" you get at MSNBC?, Right!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
poliscibabe   09:10 PM on 4/27/2009
This is how the WSJ has increased circulation - it does not remove anyone from the rolls. I subscribed to the WSJ when I was getting my MBA early in the decade. When Murdoch bought the newspaper I cancelled my subscription and stopped paying for it. I have continued to receive the paper ever since - DESPITE - refusing to pay. I asked my delivery person what was happening, he told me that he continues to get a WSJ for every NYT subscription.
photo
Mauiboy   10:31 PM on 4/27/2009
There's a financial model for failure! Sell your Newscorp stock!
Bodie1   07:41 PM on 4/27/2009
Is the WSJ figure self reported? C'mon this is Murdoch we're talking about. How is anything coming from his empire believable?
photo
fallout4U   07:01 PM on 4/27/2009
I you make what people want, they will come.
clpasm55   07:00 PM on 4/27/2009
The paper has gone down hill since Murdoch bought it. Today it is more akin to reading USA Today vs what it once was. There is nothing wrong with USA TODAY--but if I wanted pictures to tell me a story then I would buy that paper. Now, WSJ just feels like every other rag that Murdoch publishes.
photo
SmallChange   09:21 PM on 4/27/2009
And they have Peggy Noonan too!!! Yellow journalism at its best.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cartunes   06:16 PM on 4/27/2009
CONSPIRACY ? is that what liberals are saying....... Fox # 1 and WSJ # 1 oooooh its because republicans are rich and don't have to work, so they have more time for tv
photo
SmallChange   09:23 PM on 4/27/2009
What's your point? Murdoch's empire is a fraud on the people of this country, if you're that easily duped, so be it.
photo
tonewheel   09:39 AM on 4/28/2009
cartunes
Member Since April 2000
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Meah   05:54 PM on 4/27/2009
I don't believe the WSJ about anything. Why would I believe this. More conservatives reading? Not likely at all.
photo
PinkysBrain   06:32 PM on 4/27/2009
I love it when you stick your head in the sand. How is this any different than when libs accuse conservatices of believing only what they want?
photo
Kiabell04   08:21 PM on 4/27/2009
You can't even spell conservative....typical neo-con. They hate education.
photo
NeptuneDude   05:21 PM on 4/27/2009
Can someone name a 'traditional media' that is gaining audience?

That is right - newspapers when you factor in digital.

Now, radio, television, yellow pages, etc. are ALL dying.....
pfranklin400   02:12 PM on 4/27/2009
THE WSJ gives us incredible content each day with no partisan garbage like the NY Times. That is also why MSNBC's ratings are horrible. They give us nothing more than liberal lies, spins and distortions. I guess if I was Keith Oberman I would be that angry too.
photo
Mauiboy   02:33 PM on 4/27/2009
I believe that Rupert buys up all copies of the WSJ in order to line Glenn Beck's bird cage.
photo
SmallChange   09:26 PM on 4/27/2009
LOL
photo
Cheesemelt   04:43 PM on 4/27/2009
What's obvious to me is that you have never read the WSJ, and that you're a satirical genius!
photo
kasinca   05:28 PM on 4/27/2009
Rupert Murdoch owns the WSJ. It lost all credibility the day that deal closed. You are not very informed. Do you get all your information from Rush and FAUX?
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Meah   05:55 PM on 4/27/2009
That would be you, spinning and spinning.
photo
SmallChange   09:25 PM on 4/27/2009
Frankie baby are you smokin' the WSJ? The lead in the print will kill ya buddy!
 

Twitter Edition