E-book advice for Rupert Murdoch, new owner of the Wall Street Journal

By David Rothman

I won’t repeat the other stories about Rupert Murdoch, except to say that, yes, I’d prefer that the Wall Street Journal keep striving for separation between the news sections and the editorial page.

Even the better-regarded of his journalistic critics sometimes fall short in those regards.

That said, here’s one wall that I hope Murdoch (“The Dirty Digger” to his enemies) and plenty of other publishers will break down. It’s the separation between newspapers and books.

Marrying the timeliness of newspapers with the depth of books

Despite the infamous O.J. book, Murdoch’s HarperCollins actually puts out its share of distinguished titles, both fiction and nonfiction. More importantly in the wake of the Wall Street Journal deal, HarperCollins could develop a strong line of financial books in electronic format and arrange for the reborn to Journal link to and from them—both the advertising and editorial sides where appropriate. Books can explore topics in much greater depth than newspapers can, so Journal readers could come out ahead here. In the other direction, HarperCollins’ e-books could include relevant RSS feeds and other forms of dynamic updating from the Journal and other sources.

The IDPF actually may have helped by repositioning its standards side to create a format not just for e-books but for other digital documents, and none other than a representative from the Associated Press appeared at one of the group’s seminars this year.

Ad synergies

Other possible synergies exist, too. HarperCollins has been experimenting with ad-supported books, and updated, localized advertising could potentially appear in books with help from his newspaper-related sales people.

This is hardly a concept from which Murdoch alone could benefit. The Washington Post, for example, owns the former Dearborn Publishing (not to be confused with Henry Ford’s anti-semitic publishing endeavors) and could use similar strategies.

The caveats

Yes, I’m concerned about media monopolies and a diminishing of the number of voices. If I’d had my druthers, the WSJ deal wouldn’t have happened.

Just the same, both newspapers and book publishers have taken their share of financial hits, and they would be remiss in their duties, not just to shareholders but also to readers, if they did not experiment with new multimedia synergies. Both good books and good newspapers could benefit from the extra cash.

If we can see Flash videos in newspapers, which we do regularly in the New York Time and Washington Post, is it really that difficult to see newspaper-book mashups?

WSJ’s coverage of the deal: Here. NYT’s here. Remember, the WSJ’s old editors are still in charge over there.

The Murdoch-OLPC connection: Guess which media giant has sunk several million dollars into the One Laptop Per Child Project, which, done right, could provide a kickstart for publishers in developing countries. None other than Murdoch’s News Corporation. I’d love to know what all the angles are—philanthropic or otherwise. I can see both positives and negatives here.

Reminder: I write books, and, along with other publishers, big and small, HarperCollins is a potential market.