A report in Thursday's The Wall Street Journal [subscription required] reveals that American International Group (NYSE: AIG) is actually reaping the benefits of its risky bets in the credit-default swap market.

AIG was forced to shell out billions to Wall Street banks amid last year's credit crisis, as the assets backed by the credit-default swaps plummeted in value. However, the market's reversal of fortune means that banking heavyweights, such as Goldman Sachs Group (NYSE: GS), are now returning collateral to the infamous insurance giant.

Muhtar Kent, CEO of The Coca-Cola Company (NYSE: KO), took to the pages of The Wall Street Journal to argue against the government's proposed "fat tax" on soda. In a column titled "Coke Didn't Make America Fat," Kent noted that "our industry has become an easy target in this debate." However, he believes the sedentary lifestyle of Americans is to blame for our nation's obesity problem.

"If we're genuinely interested in curbing obesity, we need to take a hard look in the mirror and acknowledge that it's not just about calories in. It's also about calories out," wrote Kent. He also cited the "regressive nature and inherent illogic" of trying to rectify obesity by taxing soft drinks, observing that West Virginia and Arkansas -- two states which currently tax sodas -- are among the states with the highest obesity rates in the nation.

When News Corp. (NASDAQ: NWS) outspoken Chairman Rupert Murdoch reversed himself recently and declared that all his company's web properties would soon move to a fee model, were you perplexed? After all, Murdoch runs one of the largest media empires on the planet. Combine that with a conditioned customer used to getting almost all content for free and yes, we have a problem.

Murdoch's empire just suffered an advertising meltdown with the rest of the world, with News Corp. declaring a huge decline in ad revenue for its latest quarter. Just a few years ago, Murdoch was toying with the idea of dropping the fee for looking at the Wall Street Journal's articles and columns. He's done a 180 here and wants to bring the Journal's pay-per-use model to just about every web property his company owns while he shouts "quality journalism is not cheap" from the rooftops of Fox News.

In one of the least enlightening stories you'll ever see, The Wall Street Journal's normally insightful "Ahead of the Tape" column reports (subscription required) that "A full recovery for housing, and maybe the broader economy, depends on a third step: Prices must stop falling. On that front, as with other economic data, the "second derivative" is improving -- things are still getting worse, but at a slower rate."

That's right: In order for the real estate market to be good again, real estate prices have to stop crashing. In a related story, The Washington Nationals will need to start winning baseball games if they are to have a shot at playing in the post-season.

The entire country has been struggling with the current recession, and while we are still not out of the woods just yet, there are signs that the economic free fall is at least close to coming to an end.

This morning President Obama stated that we were starting to see "glimmers of hope" in the economy, claiming that we are "starting to see progress" on a number of fronts. While Obama admits that the economy is still under "severe stress", he noted that we are seeing a boom in demand for mortgage loans and refinancing, and a thaw in some credit markets.

Since last October, I have been repeatedly suggesting that the U.S. would be better off creating new banks rather than putting capital into zombie banks -- whose financial toxic waste prevents them from lending. This is the fifth time I have made the suggestion -- I previously posted on it here, here, here, and here. Until today, I had no idea whether anyone was listening. Now I have a hunch that at least one person might have gotten wind of the idea -- maybe he listened to this radio interview last month on KCRW.

That one person is none other than Paul Romer, an economist at Stanford's Institute for Economic Policy Research. Yesterday Romer wrote in the Wall Street Journal that the U.S. needs banks that can lend and that it would be easier for that to happen if we put TARP money into new banks rather than trying to use the money to revive the zombie ones.

Writing on TheDailyBeast (where I also have a column), Christopher Buckley points out an interesting correction from The Wall Street Journal:

The U.S. budget deficit is projected to total $1.2 trillion this year. A page-one World-Wide news summary in some editions Jan. 8 incorrectly put the figure at $1.2 billion.

Oops! The difference is only a factor of 1,000 but once you get over the $700 billion mark, does it really even matter? And since we're just going to be printing the money anyway -- we certainly don't have it sitting around -- and foisting the bill on future generations, who cares?

But that got me thinking: How many other brilliant newspaper errors have there been? It turns out that there's an entire website devoted to them. Log-on to Regret The Error and check out their best corrections of 2008. The best correction of the year goes to The Daily Mail:

In articles published on 23 and 26 May 2008, we gave the impression that Mr Gest had contracted a sexually transmitted infection and alleged that he had Liza Minnelli's dog killed without her knowledge. This was wrong. David Gest has never had a sexually transmitted infection and did not have Ms Minnelli's dog killed. We apologise to Mr Gest for any embarrassment caused.

This website is in the business and financial news business. So are a number of other online financial sites like SeekingAlpha, TheBigMoney, ClusterStock, and Minyanville. Just a few years ago, none of these operations existed.

Last year, advertising pages in tradition business magazine like BusinessWeek and Forbes were down by double digits. With the recession deepening and marketers pulling back, 2009 may not be any better.

On TV, there are now two business channels, CNBC and Fox, which is barely a year old and has horrible audience numbers. So far. But CNBC is owned by GE (NYSE:GE) and Fox is owned by News Corp (NYSE:NWS). That means both are likely to be around for a long time. They both compete against Bloomberg TV.

In the news service business, Bloomberg, Reuters, and the AP all have large financial reporting operations. In the newspaper business, The Wall Street Journal and The New York Times compete for readers.

Lest you say that this post is just a bunch of names typed onto a page, consider that the economic downturn will not support all of these media. Advertising will disappear. Perhaps more frightening, as people pull money out of the stock market, the interest in investing will drop. As investment professionals are fired, they may drop out of the business news consumption population as well.

Who may not make it? The traditional business magazines publish on weekly or fortnightly cycles. That is too long a time between articles in a world where the web delivers information in real time. They may not get enough readers on the internet to offset sales lost in print.

One thing for certain. A number of the operations with their names in this piece won't be here in 2010.

Douglas A. McIntyre is an editor at 237wallst.com.

It looks like Ben Bernanke is getting under the Wall Street Journal's skin. That's because Rupert's Rag is not happy with the direction of its candidate for President. And it is annoyed that a Republican appointee, Ben Bernanke, is helping out the Democratic candidate -- Barack Obama. That's what prompted the Journal's headline -- Bernanke endorses Obama.

Oh poor Wall Street Journal! Is this the best you can do? Why does it bother you so much that Ben Bernanke is supporting Obama's call for a new stimulus package? In an October 13th speech, Obama "urged Congress to act 'as soon as possible' before the Bush administration leaves office on January 20 to pass a stimulus measure. If Congress and the president didn't act 'it will be one of the first things I do as president of the United States.'" says Bloomberg News.

But Rupert's Rag is in the tank for McCain and although Obama is already setting U.S. policy on big issues -- a few months ago, Iraq and Bush agreed with Obama's Iraq withdrawal plan -- the Journal is upset that Bernanke and ultimately Bush will go along with Obama's proposed stimulus plan as well. First Colin Powell, and now Ben Bernanke are reading the tea leaves and choosing to position themselves for power in the next administration.

And the Journal is finally waking up to the fact that it will be on the outs for at least the next four years.

Peter Cohan is President of Peter S. Cohan & Associates. He also teaches management at Babson College and edits The Cohan Letter.

Okay, here is an absolutely brilliant idea. And no, I'm not being sarcastic. According to this blurb at The Hollywood Reporter, News Corp. (NYSE: NWS) is interested in doing a sequel to the classic 1987 film Wall Street.

Some of you younger investors out there might not be familiar with the movie, but perhaps you're familiar with the now-famous quote "Greed, for lack of a better word, is good." It was uttered by the loathsome Gordon Gekko, whose alliterative name almost oozes corporate scandal and villainy. That character was played by Michael Douglas. Wall Street was directed by Oliver Stone and it portrayed the evil side of capitalism, replete with insider trading and share-price manipulation. It's considered a classic, iconic fictional snapshot of the current zeitgeist at the time: the only thing that mattered was upward mobility and accumulation of as much net worth as conceivable without consideration for the little guy. It came out around the time of the '87 market crash, so it had that going for it.

This is why News Corp. needs to fast-track the project. According to this source from May of last year, a sequel to Wall Street was already in the works. Obviously, the fact that The Hollywood Reporter mentioned the project this week means that execs at Fox feel that the timing for a sequel is approaching an optimal point. In fact, they really should try to get it out into the marketplace as quickly as they can, and hopefully with Michael Douglas reprising his role as Gekko (Douglas' return is not set in stone at this point). Not only could the movie gross a decent amount at the box office, but think of the synergy potential here.

News Corp. is fighting a battle with General Electric's (NYSE: GE) CNBC as we speak. The Fox Business Channel wants to take away as many viewers as possible from the stock-market network. Problem is, CNBC is a very powerful brand in its arena. Of course, that doesn't deter the pit bulls at Fox. If you had to describe the media company with only one word, that word would, by necessity, be a hyphenate: ultra-competitive. In fact, Fox Business Channel recently slammed BloggingStocks' own Jim Cramer in a recent promo (see a piece on this subject by Zac Bissonnette).

The US markets did have a furious rally, rising 11% on major indexes. Overnight, Japan's Nikkei was up over 14%. The move to put money into banks and credit markets appears to be working.

But, don't forget the recession, which many economists see lasting longer than any downturn since 1974. Unemployment went to nearly 9% then. That is about 50% higher than the current 6.1% rate.

Yesterday, General Motors Corporation (NYSE:GM) said it would cut production more. Who would be surprised if the auto industry cut more jobs? The financial sector has lost tens of thousand of jobs, and as bank mergers go through, that is likely to go up sharply.

If there is on element which could pull the stock market back down, it is the realization that the economy is getting much, much worse and that corporate earnings will suffer accordingly.

A new wave of data about the economy will be coming soon. According to The Wall Street Journal, "The biggest data point is: the Census Bureau's retail sales report for September, on Wednesday. Economists expect sales tumbled for the third straight month, led by abysmal auto sales."

Investors who pour their money back into the market now, do so at their own peril. Don't forget the recession.

Douglas A. McIntyre is an editor at 247wallst.com.

In a way, we are seeing a replay of the 1980s: we are dealing with the consequences of a credit bubble as banks teeter and the economy slows down.

In today's Wall Street Journal [a paid publication], there's a great piece from some of the veterans of that era from former US Treasury Secretary Nicholas Brady, former US comptroller of the currency Eugene Ludwig, and former Fed Chairman Paul Volker.

They don't mince words. Simply put, they think the U.S. financial system is on the brink, and if action is not taken, we may see "the mother of all credit contractions."

What can be done? Interesting enough, there is a precedent: the Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC). This was a strong organization that allowed for the smooth unwinding of the S&L industry during the early 1990s.

Essentially, the RTC had full backing and a clear mandate. And when it completed its job, it actually closed down (yes, that's something that rarely happens with a federal agency).

As for the current situation, an RTC organization would be a buyer of distressed securities. Ultimately, this will encourage more trading, liquidity, and hopefully, more economic activity -- especially in the housing sector.

Unfortunately, policy makers are currently taking an ad-hoc approach, putting out one fire after another. How can this engender confidence? If anything, investors are waiting for the next financial institution to implode, which just becomes a vicious cycle.

Tom Taulli is the author of various books, including The Complete M&A Handbook and The Edgar Online Guide to Decoding Financial Statements. He is also the founder of BizEquity, a valuation website

The Wall Street Journal today corrected a story reporting that Wal-Mart Stores (NYSE: WMT) would host a Miley Cyrus performance at today's shareholders' meeting. Could the change have anything to do with those Vanity Fair photos?

Of course not. The 15-year old billion dollar phenomenon won't appear "because of a scheduling conflict, the company said." The Wall Street Journal owes its readers an explanation for its faulty reporting. And the way to do that would be to investigate the scheduling conflict. Here are some questions for the Wall Street Journal's reporters to ask Wal-Mart and Miley:

• What was the exact scheduling conflict that came up so suddenly between Thursday and this morning?
• Did Miley decide to book another concert appearance on Thursday just so she could have an excuse to cancel her appearance with Wal-Mart?
• Or did Wal-Mart suddenly decide that Miley's Vanity Fair photos made her "inappropriate"?

Can't Rupert Murdoch hire any competent journalists? We need to know what Miley's scheduling conflict was. A one line correction won't do.

Peter Cohan is President of Peter S. Cohan & Associates. He also teaches management at Babson College and edits The Cohan Letter. He has no financial interest in Wal-Mart securities.

Fortune's Devin Leonard writes about the changes that have come at the Wall Street Journal following its acquisition by News Corp. (NYSE: NWS) and concludes that Rupert Murdoch has failed to live up to his promise to maintain editorial independence at the paper.

After pushing out Marcus Brauchli as managing editor, he installed Robert Thomson at the helm -- an Australian who had previously sat at the helm of News Corp.'s The Times, a London newspaper.

There's nothing too shocking here. Gary Weiss and many others had predicted all along that, promises to the contrary aside, Murdoch would find a way to do what he wanted once he won his prize.

Leonard concludes that "Murdoch must be pleased. The Bancrofts probably feel differently. But it's too late for them to complain now. If they didn't want Murdoch to have his way, they never should have parted with Dow Jones."

The problem is that, as a public company with a fiduciary responsibility to deliver returns to shareholders, Dow Jones, ethically and maybe legally too, had to sell given that Murdoch's offer was such a strong one. The only way to avoid putting profits over journalistic integrity is to be a private company.

The New York Times reports -- with relief (since the Times' Andrew Ross Sorkin's name had been floated for the job) -- that News Corp's (NYSE: NWS) Wall Street Journal has appointed Robert Thomson, a Murdoch loyalist who formerly edited the Times of London as its managing editor. Murdoch also appointed another loyalist, Leslie Hinton, as its publisher. Thomson and Hinton will also be editor-in-chief and CEO, respectively, of Dow Jones.

I remember back when Murdoch was courting the Bancroft family and people were worried that he would replace the senior people at the Wall Street Journal with his own people. Back then, I posted that he had a track record of doing that when he took over newspapers. I did not expect a different outcome with the Journal.

I was just thinking today that since I skip over most of what the Wall Street Journal publishes in its print edition, it would not be too much of a hardship to cancel my subscription when it comes up for renewal. If Thomson's appointment means less business insight and more propaganda, that decision will be an easier one.

Peter Cohan is President of Peter S. Cohan & Associates. He also teaches management at Babson College and edits The Cohan Letter. He has no financial interest in the securities mentioned.