UK watchdog clears WSJ of inflating circulation figures

London: There is no clear evidence that The Wall Street Journal’s European edition fudged its circulation figures by funneling money to one its major subscribers, Britain’s newspaper circulation watchdog said Wednesday. The Audit Bureau of Circulations said in a statement that a review of the Journal’s circulation arrangements found that while they may have been “complex and at times circuitous,” investigators had turned up nothing to show that they broke the rules. The Wall Street Journal Europe’s circulation figures came under scrutiny in October after former employee Gert Van Mol accused it of artificially inflating its circulation figures by effectively paying for its own newspapers via third parties. He said the Netherlands-based consultancy Executive Learning Partnership was buying up thousands of copies of the newspaper at knockdown prices in return for payments and press coverage. [caption id=“attachment_172650” align=“alignleft” width=“380” caption=“The Audit Bureau of Circulations said in a statement that a review of the Journal’s circulation arrangements found had nothing to show that they broke the rules. AFP”] [/caption] The Guardian newspaper broke the story, drawing on Van Mol’s statements and internal documents to outline what it described as a “circulation scam.” Most damaging was the allegation that the deal obligated the Journal to publish at least three stories based on surveys run with the Executive Learning Partnership’s help. Two such stories eventually appeared without any warning that the partnership was sponsoring some 12 percent of the paper’s European circulation. The Journal acknowledged that it erred by writing about the partnership without disclosing the potential conflict of interest to its readers. Andrew Langhoff, a senior executive with Journal publisher Dow Jones & Co, resigned the day before the story became public. Still, Dow Jones has denied allegations of circulation fraud, saying that while the payments it arranged for the partnership were “of poor appearance” they had been properly vetted by the audit bureau, also known as the ABC. The controversy came at an extraordinarily sensitive time for Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp, which took control of the Journal when it bought Dow Jones in 2007. The multimedia conglomerate remains mired in a scandal over widespread illegality at the now-defunct British tabloid, the News of the World. Several top News Corp. executives have resigned in its wake — including former Journal publisher Les Hinton. With clouds of suspicion gathering over The Sun tabloid and renewed attention being focused on other corners of Murdoch’s empire, the whiff of scandal at the Journal’s European arm threatened to add to the impression that there were shady dealings across the company. Dow Jones, the Journal’s publisher, said in a statement that Wednesday’s findings had come as vindication. “We appreciate the ABC UK putting aside the misleading and sensationalistic press coverage from some media outlets and conducting a thorough and dispassionate review,” it said in a statement. But while ABC claimed to have carried out “a thorough review” of the Journal’s arrangements, doubts lingered. Guardian blogger Roy Greenslade condemned the investigation as a “whitewash,” while Van Mol said in an email late Wednesday that the watchdog hadn’t contacted him following Langhoff’s resignation. AP