WEB 2.0 SUMMIT — "I'm happy to say I'll have a job for the next two years," says Chris DeWolfe, CEO of MySpace, on stage with conference organizer John Battelle and his boss, News Corp. CEO Rupert Murdoch, confirming widespread rumors that he and MySpace cohort Tom Anderson had renewed their contract to run the social network for another two years. "I had to go from the nickel-and-dime newspaper culture, to the magazine culture ... to Hollywood and the Internet culture," says Murdoch, nodding to the reported — but unconfirmed — figure that DeWolfe and Anderson would make: $30 million over two years. More live coverage, after the jump.

Perhaps influenced by The New York Times recently setting its Web site free, Rupert Murdoch chimes in, saying "Me too." He's still leaning towards banishing the Wall Street Journal's online subscription model. [Reuters]

"Dow Jones & Co. has reached a tentative deal on a new contract with the union representing reporters at The Wall Street Journal, ending several months of sometimes contentious talks. ...The union posted a document on its Web site late Sunday saying the new contract offer included annual wage increases of 3 percent through 2009, compensation for jobs lost to outsourcing, and health care changes including new caps on out-of-pocket medical expenses." [A.P.]

"Richard Zannino, the chief executive of Dow Jones, prepared the way yesterday for job cuts at the company after its $5.2bn acquisition by Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. In a letter to employees of Dow Jones, publisher of the Wall Street Journal, Mr Zannino said the main goal of News Corp's $5bn acquisition was to 'increase profits by strengthening and growing our products and brands, not by slashing costs'. Mr Zannino added that 'there will be some changes', and 'where job cuts are unavoidable, we will communicate that as soon as practical'." [FT]

Congratulations to Scott Morrison, the former editor of Red Herring's website, on escaping the troubled publication and landing a new job in the San Francisco bureau of Dow Jones. No matter what they say, Rupert Murdoch has to be a better boss than Alex Vieux, whose mismanagement is driving the once-storied tech-magazine brand into the ground. We suspected he was on to greener pastures when coworkers told us he started missing work, but an announcement on the website of the The Society of American Business Editors and Writers confirms the new position for us. And for the rest of his colleagues, too. Note to Scott, next time you switch gigs, it might be more polite to send out an internal email before your underlings find out via an industry newsletter. Or some scurrilous gossip rag.

This morning, Wall Street Journal Markets reporter and union bigwig Jim "E.S." Browning sent around an email in anticipation of new owner Rupert Murdoch's visit to the offices today. Apparently, the union sent around these signs last week, to make their feelings about the takeover known. (Aww. It's the little gestures that really count!) But it seems that they've all been torn down.

A couple weeks ago, the Columbia Journalism Review defended the New York Times' coverage of the Dow Jones-Rupert Murdoch deal from the editorial writers at the Wall Street Journal, who alleged that the Times only had its own self-interest at heart: "I really object to the Journal's editorialists calling into question—by name—the motives behind The New York Times and The Financial Times for their coverage of the News Corp. story." But now people are saying that the NYT's Business section didn't have the purest of motives in its coverage—its editor is shopping a book about the deal itself.

How Rupert Murdoch was allowed to ruin Britain's Times. (Hint: It was Margaret Thatcher's fault.) Anyway, a chilling vision of the future, if you work at the Wall Street Journal. [Independent]

Dow Jones VP Paul Ingrassia (brother of Times Biz editor Larry, as we are always reminded) plans to leave the company in early 2008. Ingrassia, who was passed over for the managing editor job at the Wall Street Journal in favor of Marcus Brauchli, claims that the move has nothing to do with Rupert Murdoch's acquisition of the company, but, really, why else would you leave? [Reuters]

Today at 11 a.m., the union at Dow Jones held a meeting in the large conference room on the 9th floor of DJ headquarters down at 1 World Financial Center. The topic of discussion: "taking an action to tell Rupert loud and clear that his 'investment' in Dow Jones must start with a quality contract." Hmm! How'd that work out? Well, we understand that the conclusion that the union came to is to... sign a congratulations card for Rupert! That'll definitely sway him. Oh, and there's also talk of "taking some action" by midweek if tomorrow's bargaining session doesn't go well. This could get good!

"The Wall Street Journal is the greatest newspaper in America and one of the greatest in the world," said Rupert Murdoch in a conference call concerning News Corp's 22% rise in annual profits yesterday. "That's why we put such a premium on it and why I spent the better part of the last three months enduring criticism normally levelled at a genocidal tyrant." Poor thing! We're sure he only expected the kind of soft-pedalled criticism his papers generally direct at the tyrants in China. Anyway, what's gonna happen to Dow Jones once they hand Rupe the keys?

"'There has been too much attention paid to Dow Jones. I'm sick of reading about it. It's such a small deal,' said David Joyce, an analyst with Miller Tabak & Co." [CNN]

Dow Jones denies a report from this morning's New York Post that the Bancroft family doubled their dividend before cashing out. And here we thought they were a bunch avaricious absentee landlords who put profit above what was good for their employees. [NYO]

The best piece of the weekend concerning Rupert Murdoch's takeover of Dow Jones came from former Journal employee Joseph Nocera, who wrote (behind the TimesSelect wall, naturally) about how the takeover happened through the lens of a disgruntled Bancroft family member and Murdoch himself. Essentially, the Bancrofts were too divided and dysfunctional to ever stand a chance against the rapacious Rupert. "I just didn't realize that they were so disorganized," says Murdoch, who promises not to fiddle about too much with the paper ("I won't meddle any more than Arthur Sulzberger does."). Nocera buys it. But oh yes there is more!

Wanna hear a funny story? Guy spends every day of the past three months combing the internets for every bit of Rupert Murdoch minutiae he can find, rising with the dawn to scrape the bottom of the barrel for a daily post of interest to only about seven people. Then, on the biggest two days of the story, when actual civilians are sort of interested in what's going on with the Wall Street Journal? He's trapped in jury duty! Could he be any more bitter? No. Will you have to hear about all about jury duty later? Probably! Life is just unfuckingfair. Anyway, here's the day in Murdoch, like you give a shit.

The Observer takes another look at the Murdoch takeover today, and argues that the Bancrofts were kinda misled by their advisers about the takeover deal. Why? Well, it has to do with James Ottaway Jr.'s rather unfortunate choice of words ("30 shekels of silver to their investment bankers, and 30 shekels of gold to their corporate lawyers") about how much money the Bancrofts had to shell out to their outside advisers to get the deal done. $30 million! And all of it was paid by... News Corp.? The most obvious problem being: say that Rupert was reportedly working on this deal for two years. The Bancrofts were working on it for, what, two months? Yeah.

At 11:15 this morning, Wall Street Journal managing editor Marcus Brauchli, Dow Jones CEO Rich Zannino, WSJ publisher Gordon Crovitz and a couple other bigwigs gathered the Journal employees for a 45-minute sit-down. Each of them gave assurances that Rupert Murdoch would not meddle in the paper. Zannino, says a source who was at the meeting, was particularly insistent that there were no down sides to the deal, invoking a quote by former DJ CEO Peter Kann: "News Corp. wouldn't tarnish the trophy they've been coveting for years." That's awfully libertarian of them! But just in case it turns out Murdoch doesn't, in fact, have the paper's best interests at heart, there are a bunch of safeguards in place (like this editorial agreement!) to make sure he doesn't stick his vengeful little paws into the Journal's editorial integrity. Not that the reporters were buying it.

Now that News Corp. appears to have locked up Dow Jones, publisher of the Wall Street Journal, every journalist on the planet is volunteering to be an unpaid consultant to Rupert Murdoch. I'm sure he appreciates the free advice. The News Corp. CEO is so known for taking it, after all. First up, there's Kara Swisher's tabloid-headlined call for more "promiscuity," which I was about to get behind. Talk about a paper that needs sexing up! But then I discovered that the word, in Swisher's hands, has gone entirely limp. Her deflated meaning?

Hot on the heels of Marcus Brauchli's unreassuringly reassuring email to the Wall Street Journal staff is Dow Jones CEO Rich Zannino's even less reassuring email. It's full of platitudes like "The bright future for Dow Jones is built on your commitment." In other words: Please don't quit en masse! Also, the deal was great for shareholders. Like himself! The full memo after the jump.

Former Dow Jones board member James Ottaway Jr., on the Murdoch takeover: "At this global information age, it is outrageous that anyone should have to pay an estimated $30 million to outside advisors. It is ironic indeed for the Bancroft family to have to pay 30 shekels of silver to their investment bankers, and 30 shekels of gold to their corporate lawyers, for scaring some of them into betraying their 105-year family loyalty to Dow Jones independence." [NYO]