Alix Freedman Leaves Wall Street Journal For Reuters

Alix Freedman, a top reporter and editor at the Wall Street Journal, has departed for Reuters after 27 years at the paper.

Freedman is the third staffer to leave the Journal in two days. (A technology and media reporter both left the paper on Tuesday.)

Freedman joined the Journal in 1984, working for the paper's Philadelphia bureau. She rose through the ranks of the Journal, becoming a senior special writer in 1991. She won a Pulitzer Prize in 1996 for her reporting on the tobacco industry.

She became a deputy managing editor at the paper and, in April 2011, was named Page One editor. Ironically, the person she replaced also left to join Reuters.

Below, see the full memo (obtained by HuffPost's Michael Calderone) from editor Robert Thomson about Freedman's departure:

Dear All, Our esteemed colleague and my friend Alix Freedman has decided to join Thomson Reuters (departing one Thomson for the clutches of another) after 27 years of extraordinary service for The Wall Street Journal. We all owe Alix a great debt for what she has contributed to the paper and the culture, and her impact and imprint will linger for many years. She will leave our shores at the end of next week, by which time her successor will be announced, so please seek her out and send her your personal best.

Robert.

Comments

[Christmas Tree]

12:16 PM on 09/12/2011

I worked for the WSJ in the early 80's. It was a wonderful place to work, and had very stringent rules about professionalism and personal conduct.

[MimiGardner]

12:05 PM on 09/11/2011

Yet another journalist has decided to abandon ole Rupert.

[indjoe]

05:54 AM on 09/11/2011

The Wall Street Journal has become the same as Fox News ; a right wing yellow journal own by
news corp now. It has turn in too just another republican party spin machine; not surprised that the best reporters and staff are living !

[Kenz300]

03:00 PM on 09/10/2011

It seems the phone hacking scandal in the UK may be more than a lone reporters misdeeds.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/08/19/us-murdoch-emails-police-idUSTRE77I58B20110819

[InfinteShibumi]

01:22 PM on 09/11/2011

Ok, but Alix was at the WSJ long before Murdoch took over.

[TJ Logan]

04:18 PM on 09/09/2011

The article fails to mention that the WSJ is now owned by that paragon of fair journalism News Corp/FOX.

Any trained traditional journalist, who values his reputation as well as his career, would not remain with the WSJ.

Rupert Murdoch, and his News Corp/FOX News/WSJ does not practice journalism, but has descended into the abyss of loonie right wing populism.

Further the personal power of Murdoch, to prevent his press organs from reporting stories was well illustrated as his purportedly "news outlets" refused to cover the major press scandal of the last 10 years - that of News Corp and Murdoch behaving, in the words of the Conservative Prime Minister of the UK, as a "criminal enterprise."

My advise to any WSJ reporters who value their reputation, and as a former subscriber to the WSJ for 35 years - get out now.

[docketeer09]

08:14 AM on 09/10/2011

TJ, you are right that Murdoch doesn't practice journalism, most certainly not happening since his takeover of the Wall Screed Urinal. He pays to play and has compromised many a pol in D.C. (London, Canberra, etc.) in order to fast-track, here, his U.S. citizenship so he could continue to acquire American media assets and put his unique "Murdochian" spin on all "news" of the "world." It's all about him, nothing else. The WSJ used to be a fine business news paper with solid reporting and editing. Good for any self-respecting reporter or editor who finds a way out!! Peace!

[Gavin Saunders]

02:35 PM on 09/09/2011

~'Coulson's solicitors have written to the culture, media and sport committee declining an invitation to "reconsider, or make any additional comments on," the evidence he gave to the committee in 2009. Coulson's lawyers cited "concerns" about "parallel inquiries and investigations and the publicity generated by them".'~

Does Ms. Freedman see how untenable it is to work for an organization where such ludicrous hypocrisy abounds?

[Cacey]

01:27 PM on 09/09/2011

Anyone who thinks that the WSJ is the same great newspaper that it was prior to Murdoch's buying it is sorely wrong. Sure, it may be bigger and have a lot of non-business related coverage but in essence it is FoxPrint. Now we'll see what it has in common with its British Sister Publications.

[gregory57]

01:24 AM on 09/09/2011

Just a rat jumping one of Murdoch's sinking ships.

[knott wrench]

05:30 PM on 09/07/2011

'ol Rupert "Big Brother" Murdock's slimy tentacles claim; One Victim after another!

[matt spedale]

04:08 PM on 09/07/2011

I read many newspapers but I like Wall Street the best by far. If you look to the editorials they lean right but not if you actually read the articles. They are critical of everyone left and right. They cater to business and business doesn't care about left or right they care about making a profit.

[blood1]

02:38 PM on 09/08/2011

Can I have some of whatever you are smoking / drinking: Business doesn't care about left or right and editorials "lean right"....did you just wake up from a self induced coma?

I am but a poor person and because WSJ (Murdoch) put up a paywall - I suppose we are to believe you, cuz you read "many newspapers?

I suspect many WSJ staff would like to get out from under the Murdoch shadow in light of what is happening in UK and Australia. If DOJ brings charges, then we will see many rats leaving the ship...currently only the top names are being given the option of bailing out early!

[Red45]

06:53 PM on 09/11/2011

You couldn't be more wrong. The WSJ is an ultra-right rag now and they are not critical of themselves (as you say) but save their defamation for everything left of Murdoch.

[dax49]

12:57 PM on 09/07/2011

Why bother-her credibility is already shot!

[hopingheart]

12:18 PM on 09/07/2011

Ships deserting a sinking rat?

[ecrichert12]

01:15 PM on 09/07/2011

The one paper making money and monetizing online content is a sinking rat?

[hopingheart]

01:34 PM on 09/07/2011

Reading their editorial pages, absolutely yes!

[moslef]

02:41 PM on 09/07/2011

I am sure many journalists don't want to be associated with the business practices of the Murdoch family. Their credibility is sinking at the moment.

[matt spedale]

04:09 PM on 09/07/2011

I think they moved to the top spot above USA today last year including online subs. Far from sinking but nice observation.

[wildcherry69]

11:37 AM on 09/07/2011

This is not good. Something is going on.

[plaidsportcoat]

04:07 PM on 09/07/2011

Or...this is GOOD! Something is going ON!

[emlr]

11:40 AM on 09/12/2011

Best reply of the day!