I expect serious, high quality, unbiased reporting and content from the WSJ. After listening to a number of episodes from The Journal (~8), which seems like a reasonable sample size, I’m disappointed to say that’s not what I’ve found in The Journal. Here’s what what I’ve heard: - Surface-level reporting of information easily available via other formats (like the websites of any news outlet). Why tell me information I can easily glean from headlines and other outlets? That makes sense where needed to provide context but should then be followed by something deeper. Listening to this show is like attending a seater dinner where only appetizers are served. - Hosts and guests seem to lack gravitas and depth of knowledge and are sometimes cavalier. - Hosts and guests sometimes speculate about states of mind and intentions of their subjects. I like analysis and am fine with such speculation, but it should be clear that its opinion and should be backed up by facts. Not the case in some instances. - Hosts and guests seem left leaning. Matt Gaetz and Pam Bondi were compared as nominees for attorney general with hardly any mention of the dramatic differences between them. Pam served as Florida AG for years, but that qualification was unmentioned (I think). Also, the guest’s commentary about Pam suggested an almost robotic allegiance to and willingness to execute the wishes of Trump. Political reporter Molly Ball also seems left leaning. I hate to be writing a review like this for a program I am inclined to like and to give the benefit of the doubt.

I used to enjoy listening to the Journal - with the reporting now focused on politics over business and money, I find myself simply tuning out and looking elsewhere. As of late, the programming is not entertaining or informative.

It is a shame when even a Wall Street Journal sponsored podcast cannot provide news without a liberal bias. While there are quality episodes, I want news and information and not this type of slant. It is a kinder, gentler version of liberal opinion pieces than most other main stream media - but liberal shaped opinion (at times even clearly at odds with facts) just the same. As a longtime WSJ reader, I am sorry to leave and unfollow.

This is normally one of my favorite podcasts, but the coverage around elections has diverted from the focus of the podcast. I would like to see more stories about the business world rather than political coverage. If I wanted to listen to political coverage, I have numerous other options, but this podcast was unique in it’s focus on companies and business stories overall. I will rate again once the political coverage subsides.

Their political coverage is basically an opinion and it is wildly inaccurate, they are so liberal that they just can’t get past themselves.

It is very pleasing to hear that your daily attempt to bias the American voter toward the Democrats is over! I hope this is wake up call to the WSJ, ABC, NBC, CBS and NYT that your control and influence of the American people is over. We are smart enough to find unbiased, balanced, legitimate news sources who do not have an agenda! Begin providing legitimate journalism or be forgotten! Also happy to see that Molly Ball has to be the one reporting this after she inundated us with hack journalism all along the way with a Harris agenda.

Lots of episodes are really interesting but you can tell that they are liberal left and woke which is annoying

The role of media should be neutral, reporting the facts as they are. But this media is so so so biased.

Hahaha some funny bits mixed with deep dives into news. So I listen

I stopped listening to the podcast because of the background music while someone is speaking ! I decided to give this podcast another try but STILL does it! Please try listening to the podcast with your eyes closed and you will realize how obnoxious and annoying the background music is!! :(

This would be my favorite podcast but adding background music while listening to the report is very distracting. If the reporting is top notch, music should not be necessary. There is so much multitasking attempted these days contributing to short attention spans. If I want to listen to music, I will choose my genre and artists. If I want serious stories, I don’t want music disrupting listening to the orator. WSJ can and should do better.

I’m speaking of this program’s occasional deep dives on newsworthy topics over several episodes, like the one I just listened to: The Missing Minister.

Assumes that listeners are uninformed.

Non political coverage is good but too much coverage of negative conservative topics. Things like Bidens accelerating dementia and cities falling apart due to Democrat AG non-prosecution policies gets glossed over while topics of Trumps different prosecutions get a lot of episodes. Clearly the editorial staff of this podcast live in a city like NYC or Chicago and have similar bias as the other side would have in more conservative areas.

I prefer the topic that was not already covered in “The Daily”. Also, I hope somebody will respond to the request for comments one day.

Not terrible, but often missing key elements of stories that would more completely inform listeners. And presented in a manner/tone that suggest a naivety/ignorance on the part of the presenters. I could get just as nuanced information with less time spent googling. 🤷‍♂️ No more for me, thanks.

title says it all — less polarizing nonsense, more journalistic integrity. I’ve learned a lot from this pod, kudos to those behind it.

It’s so disappointing that not a word was spoken in this show about Vance’s repeated lies: about illegal immigrants in Springfield, Ohio; about Trump supposedly saving Obamacare; about the 2020 “peaceful transfer of power” - the fact that these highly consequential lies are not newsworthy enough to cover just demonstrates how normalized this behavior has become. Very dangerous and all too common in media coverage of late. And Vance had the audacity to complain about his lies being fact-checked. Please do better and highlight how unacceptable (& disqualifying) this behavior is.

Things are well covered at times, but you can tell in the Red, White and who segments that they are all voting for Kamala. Dismissing something Trump said without even explaining what it might be based on.

Not sure what’s going on at the WSJ. They used to be amazing. Unbiased and fair. Such great podcasts and very thorough and insightful. Now they have started using loaded language to bias listeners. Phrases such as ‘ this group FINALLY did this’ and ‘this person FLIP FLOPPED’ on this. If I wanted spin, I’d go to MSNBC or BREITBART. WSJ, please go back to to the middle!!

Just tried to listen for the first time and the random AI techno music they put over the podcast were unbearable and distracting. It adds nothing. Won’t be listening again.

The show generally has great content. What makes the Wall Street journal so good is their general journalistic integrity. Unfortunately, during the road to the white house series Molly has definitely shown her blue sided tendencies and it hurts the information she provides.

This show is awesome and has great commentary on many topics. Please ignore any far right 1 star reviews you see! If they so much as say anything slightly positive about Kamala Harris or something slightly negative about Trump, the inbred folk will start attacking with 1 star reviews. The hosts’ commentary is much more nuanced than that. Great show!

This show is good when not focusing on politics. Will delete for now, might return after elections.

I used to like WSJ podcasts. Now I’m slowly deleting them. These so called reporters are left biased. The WSJ needs to scrub their staff and put it back to the middle.

I used to love the journal. I went to the podcast for a fair, balanced take on all things business, global topics, and more recently politics. It feels clear the journal podcast has been going left on all of their political takes lately. It makes me sad because it has hard to find a balanced take this day and age with a majority of media supporting the left heavily. Feels the only podcasts I can rely on for a balanced take on things are podcasts like “All In”

I can’t listen to the narrator. The nasally slow droning speaker turns me off. Please find someone better.

This show is great when focusing on businesses stories and global events. Their coverage of this election has been pretty bad. The double standard exemplified in Friday’s episode on Kamala’s interview was as unprofessional and biased as this show has maybe ever been. I’m not even one to say she crushed it or anything, but the slant of the episode was unlike anything this show has really ever put out.

The coverage of the Harris interview was so embarrassing for them. Questioning the motives behind everything Harris said and summing it up as “mid” while they briefly touch upon trumps “flurry” of interviews with only a passing comment on him literally saying Jesus was going to come down and change votes.

Extremely biased - this show is a disappointment and is in the bag for Democrats.

When this podcast covers economic issues and business decisions, it feels like what you’d expect. But lately, they’re letting nakedly partisan content leak in, particularly with regard to presidential politics. Also filled with obnoxious, repetitive ads. Not as good as it used to be.

Listened to the episode today and it is extraordinarily disconcerting to see such a shift in coverage. Normally the pod is somewhat balanced, but now it’s pretty obvious the Murdochs are influencing everything once again. Episode spent 10 minutes excoriating Harris on what the hosts called a “mid” interview but praise Donald Trump for the “interviews” he has given Those Trump bloviations are nothing but lies, deceit, and the inane laden ramblings of someone suffering from dimension. The pod never takes Trump to task for what he says, but will spend practically an entire episode tearing down Harris for “mid.”

I didn’t think WSJ would be liberal leaning, I thought they’re more conservative or at least neutral I was wrong. Episodes that talks about politics are definitely in liberal tones, hiding facts or did not discuss both sides of the issue. Not really journalists, just another Democrats propaganda

Once great but has now lost its way and become heavily biased. Unsubscribed

Check out the ugly space between the A and L, for example. I expect better typography from such a huge New York media company.

Sometimes their coverage on companies, like Etsy, make me wonder who is paying the reporter - or if they getting coverage because of their close ´friendship’ with business leaders. This is a big business promoting newspaper and their investigative reporting is light or business friendly. Not trustworthy for the average consumer

Yes, this and Industry are the way the finance world works. It’s what generations before them have done. In exchange you get paid very well and you get an INCREDIBLE amount of experience. You can then write your own career path with a six or seven figure annual salary and likely retire at 35. If someone got into the business without realizing it then they were blinded by the potential $$$ and ignored the warning signs in the interview process. This is nothing new; M&A deals don’t care about work life balance.

Love this podcast when the stories are interesting, and typically about business or technology. I especially love any multipart episodes. Don’t care much for the episodes that lean into any politics. I skip all of those.

Humiliatingly biased towards the Democrats. I am an independent and couldn’t make it through. Please PLEASE just be normal!!!

Whole episode on ozempic wasn’t a discussion. It sounded like a scripted commercial for it. Hard pass on this podcast

New sound before the episode comes back from commercials is so annoying, specially with headphones on. It’s like a static sound

I’m a teen and it is amazing how I can understand a news podcast. I enjoy listening to it everyday and it is informative and keeps me up to date.

Good pod but literally the worst, most annoying ads

How any political coverage can question Kamala Harris’s credibility based on her evolving policy positions without also pointing out Donald Trump & J.D. Vance’s exact same behavior is deeply troubling.

This is my favorite podcast, hands down. I’m always excited to wake up to see what the new article will be. The Journal has access to world class reporters around the globe who have access to some of the most important people that are shaping our future, and help explain what’s happened in the past. I’m thankful to the non-biased reporting that is offered and to the hard work that I know it must take to deliver these stories, every day. In a world where it’s more difficult to get non-biased news, reporting like this is ever more vital and precious. Thank you, thank you, Thank You!

You conveniently left out that her” I was the little black girl on the bus” was a lie. She came from a very wealthy family and went to private school but at least we now know the journal has joined the rest of the MSM to lie to the public

Seems like a copy of NPR, low energy, sounds like everyone is younger than 30 (guests and hosts). You can feel the NPR arrogance through their upspeak voices. Really wish it was harder hitting and didn’t skip facts or parts of the story that doesn’t fit a narrative that they shouldn’t be pushing. WSJ used to be my favorite rag. Go back to old-school reporting please.

I enjoy the range of topics that is discussed on this podcast. The producers explore many aspects of money people and power. I always enjoy seeing a new episode in my feed.

WSJ is no longer financial news but more left leaning political propaganda.

The reason these podcasts are only 20 minutes is because they tell only half the story. The podcasters at WSJ apparently didn’t get the memo that these aren’t op-eds, routinely putting a lefty slant on news stories. I guess they figure young people get their news via podcast and they need to appeal to that demographic. Overall, a disappointing product, and listeners should take what they hear with a big shaker of salt.