<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" media="screen" href="http://s2.wp.com/wp-content/themes/vip/newyorkobserver/stylesheets/rss.css"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Observer &#187; Reports: Murdoch, Bancrofts Close to a Deal</title>
	<atom:link href="http://observer.com/2007/06/reports-murdoch-bancrofts-close-to-a-deal/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://observer.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 25 May 2013 15:15:43 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language></language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
<cloud domain='observer.com' port='80' path='/?rsscloud=notify' registerProcedure='' protocol='http-post' />

	<atom:link rel="search" type="application/opensearchdescription+xml" href="http://observer.com/osd.xml" title="Observer" />
	<atom:link rel='hub' href='http://observer.com/?pushpress=hub'/>
		<item>
				
		<title>Reports: Murdoch, Bancrofts Close to a Deal</title>

		<comments>http://observer.com/2007/06/reports-murdoch-bancrofts-close-to-a-deal/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Jun 2007 11:48:31 -0400</pubDate>
					<link>http://observer.com/2007/06/reports-murdoch-bancrofts-close-to-a-deal/</link>
			<dc:creator>Tom McGeveran</dc:creator>
				
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.observer.com/2007/06/reports-murdoch-bancrofts-close-to-a-deal/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Well, <em>The New York Times </em>comes a day later than Matthew Drudge predicted--and arguably a dollar shorter--with <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/25/business/media/25murdoch.html?hp">its front-page investigative piece</a> on Rupert Murdoch and News Corp.</p>
<p>He lobbies! He uses <em>The New York Post </em>to advance his agenda! He courts powerful people on both sides, especially since Ted Kennedy once made him cry and have to sell <em>The New York Post!</em> </p>
<p>But it&#039;s certainly worth reading as a primer on the workings of Rupert Murdoch&#039;s influence over his own business environment. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/25/business/media/25journal.html?hp">The more urgent piece</a>, coming from Siklos, Sorkin and Perez-Pena, who have been leading the newspaper&#039;s coverage of the Murdoch bid, asserts that the Bancrofts and the Murdoch&#039;s are close to finalizing a deal that is meant to guarantee editorial independence to Dow Jones publications if a deal to buy the company went through. The arrangement is a prerequisite for a sale by the Bancrofts, and though both sides cautioned that it was not yet clear whether the sides could come to terms on other features of a deal, the editorial independence framework has been regarded as the crucial piece for some weeks now:</p>
<div class="oldbq">
<p>If an agreement on newsroom independence were to be made by the Dow Jones board, the News Corporation and the Bancroft family, the only barrier standing in the way of Mr. Murdoch’s control of The Wall Street Journal would be the selling price. </p>
</div>
<p>It looks as though the Bancrofts are the ones losing ground on this:</p>
<div class="oldbq">
<p>Over the weekend, Mr. Murdoch responded to a proposal of editorial assurances the Bancrofts sent him on Friday, which his advisers described as wholly unacceptable and virtually identical to what the Bancrofts had proposed three weeks ago. Mr. Murdoch’s counterproposal closely mirrored Mr. Murdoch’s initial proposal, said one person with knowledge of the offer who was not authorized to speak publicly. </p>
</div>
<p><a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118273728865446724.html?mod=rss_media_and_marketing"><em>The Wall Street Journal </em>this morning reports</a> that disagreement over the deal had emotions running high this weekend.</p>
<div class="oldbq">
<p class="times">After a couple of weeks of relative inactivity, takeover talks  heated up over the weekend and were moving quickly. The talks were characterized  as constructive, but not before generating high emotions and brinksmanship on  both sides. News Corp., which is offering $5 billion for Dow Jones, threatened  to back out of the negotiations and told Dow Jones at one point it was about to  send a letter pulling out.</p>
<p class="times">To respond to Dow Jones&#039;s editorial-independence proposal, News  Corp. sent back a significantly altered draft yesterday morning, according to a  person familiar with the matter. News Corp.&#039;s proposal cut out portions of the  board&#039;s initial proposal and reduced the Bancroft family&#039;s involvement in the  structure designed to safeguard the editorial independence of Dow Jones, this  person said.</p>
</div>
<p class="times">According to the <em>Journal </em>article, editorial is weighing in heavily.</p>
<div class="oldbq">
<p class="times">Marcus W. Brauchli, the Journal&#039;s recently appointed managing editor, and Paul  Gigot, editor of its editorial page, have been advising the family on editorial  principles and have taken on a more central role over the weekend, according to  a person familiar with the matter. </p>
</div>
<p>That resulted in a proposal that on Friday had Mr. Murdoch steaming.</p>
<div class="oldbq">
<p class="times">After receiving the proposal from Dow Jones&#039;s board Friday, News  Corp.&#039;s Mr. Murdoch called Dow Jones&#039;s CEO, Richard F. Zannino, and Bancroft  family legal adviser Martin Lipton to express his anger and disappointment with  the proposal, according to people familiar with the matter.</p>
<p class="times">Mr. Murdoch was incensed by the contents of the proposal, which  he found &quot;insulting,&quot; according to a person close to him. His advisers drafted a  two-page withdrawal of his $60-a-share offer for Dow Jones over the weekend. But  before it was sent, a top News Corp. executive called a Dow Jones board adviser,  and they agreed that the two sides could negotiate, say people close to News  Corp.</p>
</div>
<p>Features of the independence deal currently under discussion are: </p>
<ul>
<li>16-member board of directors at Dow Jones, maintained by News Corp.</li>
<li>Five of those 16 directors selected jointly by News Corporation and the Bancrofts to form &#039;editorial independence&#039; committee</li>
<li>Committee oversees hiring of managing editor and editorial page editor</li>
<li>Managing editor to approve any deal to use the Journal brand with any business not owned by News Corporation </li>
<li>Oversight of Dow Jones brands, budgets and the appointment of publisher out of the committee&#039;s purview </li>
<li>One seat on News Corporation board to a Bancroft family member of News Corp&#039;s choosing-not two, chosen by the Bancrofts, as the family had previously proposed</li>
</ul>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, <em>The New York Times </em>comes a day later than Matthew Drudge predicted--and arguably a dollar shorter--with <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/25/business/media/25murdoch.html?hp">its front-page investigative piece</a> on Rupert Murdoch and News Corp.</p>
<p>He lobbies! He uses <em>The New York Post </em>to advance his agenda! He courts powerful people on both sides, especially since Ted Kennedy once made him cry and have to sell <em>The New York Post!</em> </p>
<p>But it&#039;s certainly worth reading as a primer on the workings of Rupert Murdoch&#039;s influence over his own business environment. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/25/business/media/25journal.html?hp">The more urgent piece</a>, coming from Siklos, Sorkin and Perez-Pena, who have been leading the newspaper&#039;s coverage of the Murdoch bid, asserts that the Bancrofts and the Murdoch&#039;s are close to finalizing a deal that is meant to guarantee editorial independence to Dow Jones publications if a deal to buy the company went through. The arrangement is a prerequisite for a sale by the Bancrofts, and though both sides cautioned that it was not yet clear whether the sides could come to terms on other features of a deal, the editorial independence framework has been regarded as the crucial piece for some weeks now:</p>
<div class="oldbq">
<p>If an agreement on newsroom independence were to be made by the Dow Jones board, the News Corporation and the Bancroft family, the only barrier standing in the way of Mr. Murdoch’s control of The Wall Street Journal would be the selling price. </p>
</div>
<p>It looks as though the Bancrofts are the ones losing ground on this:</p>
<div class="oldbq">
<p>Over the weekend, Mr. Murdoch responded to a proposal of editorial assurances the Bancrofts sent him on Friday, which his advisers described as wholly unacceptable and virtually identical to what the Bancrofts had proposed three weeks ago. Mr. Murdoch’s counterproposal closely mirrored Mr. Murdoch’s initial proposal, said one person with knowledge of the offer who was not authorized to speak publicly. </p>
</div>
<p><a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118273728865446724.html?mod=rss_media_and_marketing"><em>The Wall Street Journal </em>this morning reports</a> that disagreement over the deal had emotions running high this weekend.</p>
<div class="oldbq">
<p class="times">After a couple of weeks of relative inactivity, takeover talks  heated up over the weekend and were moving quickly. The talks were characterized  as constructive, but not before generating high emotions and brinksmanship on  both sides. News Corp., which is offering $5 billion for Dow Jones, threatened  to back out of the negotiations and told Dow Jones at one point it was about to  send a letter pulling out.</p>
<p class="times">To respond to Dow Jones&#039;s editorial-independence proposal, News  Corp. sent back a significantly altered draft yesterday morning, according to a  person familiar with the matter. News Corp.&#039;s proposal cut out portions of the  board&#039;s initial proposal and reduced the Bancroft family&#039;s involvement in the  structure designed to safeguard the editorial independence of Dow Jones, this  person said.</p>
</div>
<p class="times">According to the <em>Journal </em>article, editorial is weighing in heavily.</p>
<div class="oldbq">
<p class="times">Marcus W. Brauchli, the Journal&#039;s recently appointed managing editor, and Paul  Gigot, editor of its editorial page, have been advising the family on editorial  principles and have taken on a more central role over the weekend, according to  a person familiar with the matter. </p>
</div>
<p>That resulted in a proposal that on Friday had Mr. Murdoch steaming.</p>
<div class="oldbq">
<p class="times">After receiving the proposal from Dow Jones&#039;s board Friday, News  Corp.&#039;s Mr. Murdoch called Dow Jones&#039;s CEO, Richard F. Zannino, and Bancroft  family legal adviser Martin Lipton to express his anger and disappointment with  the proposal, according to people familiar with the matter.</p>
<p class="times">Mr. Murdoch was incensed by the contents of the proposal, which  he found &quot;insulting,&quot; according to a person close to him. His advisers drafted a  two-page withdrawal of his $60-a-share offer for Dow Jones over the weekend. But  before it was sent, a top News Corp. executive called a Dow Jones board adviser,  and they agreed that the two sides could negotiate, say people close to News  Corp.</p>
</div>
<p>Features of the independence deal currently under discussion are: </p>
<ul>
<li>16-member board of directors at Dow Jones, maintained by News Corp.</li>
<li>Five of those 16 directors selected jointly by News Corporation and the Bancrofts to form &#039;editorial independence&#039; committee</li>
<li>Committee oversees hiring of managing editor and editorial page editor</li>
<li>Managing editor to approve any deal to use the Journal brand with any business not owned by News Corporation </li>
<li>Oversight of Dow Jones brands, budgets and the appointment of publisher out of the committee&#039;s purview </li>
<li>One seat on News Corporation board to a Bancroft family member of News Corp&#039;s choosing-not two, chosen by the Bancrofts, as the family had previously proposed</li>
</ul>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://observer.com/2007/06/reports-murdoch-bancrofts-close-to-a-deal/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://2.gravatar.com/avatar/becf95fa833b8aeb13f7720732bd6dc6?s=96&#38;d=identicon&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">jhanasobserver</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
