Dow Jones, led by The Wall Street Journal, reported stellar profits of $588m on annual revenues of $2.33 billion for the year that ended on June 30, cementing its position as the standout performer within News Corporation’s portfolio.
While the Journal has seen to be revived journalistically under the leadership of editor-in-chief Emma Tucker, rising digital subscriptions and strong demand for the group’s professional information services have turned it into the profit engine of News Corp more widely.
Total subscriptions to Dow Jones consumer products – including The Wall Street Journal, Barron’s, and MarketWatch – rose 7% year-on-year to 6.3 million. Of these, more than 5.7 million were digital-only, up 9%.
The Wall Street Journal now has more than 4.5 million subscriptions, with digital-only subscribers surpassing 4.1 million. This represents 91% of its total subscriber base. Tucker’s emphasis on digital engagement is clearly bearing fruit.
While advertising continues to play a smaller role in Dow Jones’s revenue mix, digital advertising proved resilient. Print advertising declined 5% year-on-year, but digital remained flat, with digital now comprising 65% of total ad revenue.
The strong performance of Dow Jones helped lift News Corp’s overall results. Group-wide revenues rose 2% to $8.45 billion, and net income from continuing operations jumped 71% to $648 million. The company cited Dow Jones, Digital Real Estate Services and Book Publishing as its core growth areas.
By contrast, the News Media segment – which includes News UK, the Australian titles and The New York Post – saw full-year revenues decline by 4% to $2.17 billion, although cost-cutting helped improve profitability. Segment Ebitda rose 15% to $153 million.
News Corp CEO Robert Thomson used the results to both celebrate Dow Jones’s momentum and sound a warning about the impact of artificial intelligence on journalism. “The AI age must cherish the value of intellectual property if we are collectively to realise our potential,” he said. “To undermine that comparative advantage by stripping away IP rights is to vandalise our virtuosity.”
