The Journal.

All Genres #132News #15Daily News #5

The most important stories about money, business and power. Hosted by Kate Linebaugh and Ryan Knutson, with Jessica Mendoza. The Journal is a co-production of Spotify and The Wall Street Journal.

Get show merch here:

Recent Episodes
Episodes loading...
Recent Reviews
  • Rachway12245
    Going downhill
    Have been listening to this podcast for a while and enjoyed the variety of topics presented. Listened recently (story about Elon Musk) and it sounds more like a gossip column than good journalism. This is terrible. WSJ- you can and should do better.
  • Indyeche
    Good information
    Thank for your work Easy to understand and quick
  • NYC698
    Ozempic advertising?
    I listed to all four of the “shot” episodes and was disappointed in the lack of serious journalism and clear language. For example, in the final episode, there was a significant discussion about the potential ancillary benefits of the weight loss drug, e.g., heart, etc. But from my readings, it’s not the drugs, but the weight loss itself, that’s causing these benefits. The whole thing just felt like n Ozempic/et al ad without hard questions.
  • Davidjschultz
    Going downhill
    This podcast is progressively going downhill. Much of the subject matter is now akin to what i might see on primetime “news” documentaries- more about sensationalism than serious business content.
  • Vaebd
    SBF coverage was mediocre. Too many “like” insertions, sounds very amateurish. Transcripts read well, but the vocal fry of many of the speakers renders an audio product almost unlistenable.
  • Finn and Ringo
    Latest Podcast Episode
    Have loved the show thus far. However, annoyed with the latest episode about the President’s so called “cognitive decline.” The media as a whole has latched onto this narrative because it’s popular dogma among the far right and far left. Yes the man is old! OK we get it! Thank you! He stumbles on words during public speaking, don’t we all? Also he grew up with a speech impediment that no one seems to talk about. Look at the other candidate who most likely will be our next President. He’s almost the same age and speaks nonsense, is a pathological liar and a felon. Can we talk about his true mental issues? You are basing your story off a few interviews… This episode seems to have been made to spew gossip and get listeners. Whatever happened to reporting with integrity?
  • Listener@99
    Fair reporting
    I listen to this podcast frequently but the episode today covering Biden might be fair if they also cover the other presidential candidates in the same way. I would love to hear the exact same reporting on Trump so we can fairly evaluate each candidate. Trump isn’t exactly a youngster and her constantly has notes and is absolutely senseless a good deal of the time. At least Biden makes sense and surrounds himself with smart people. How about covering that. Both candidates are not ideal, but this biased coverage will make me stop listening.
  • lamby183
    Normally enjoyable…but check the partisanship
    The Republican and conservative sourced Biden hit piece is poor reporting and does not deserve amplification on this podcast. So far I haven’t seen a strong political leaning on this podcast despite the terrible misinformation vomited in the opinion section of the WSJ, so I normally enjoy the show. Please remember that and steer clear of this kind of garbage in the future.
    Rupert Murdoch’s Rag
    Seems to hire on the cheap young reporters out of the gate. of course they’ll try to impress the old man and the minions below him. The Wall Street Journal lacks credibility. Their glory days of smart reporting gone.
  • Mdhmmm
    WSJ devolved into Socialist nonesense
    It's sad, as a subscriber to the WSJ for over 14 years, it has been very sad to see it & this podcast go the way of CNN, MSNBC, & other Socialist entrenched publications. This podcast is actually leftist socialism on steroids. The kids who produce it seem genuinely supportive of the new age progressivism, making excuses for pedophilia, seeing the American flag as a white supremacy, criticising the first amendment for citizens. Sad, or pathetic really, time to find a news source, not this warmed over communism disguised as modern thinking.
  • Not_a_froggo👍👍👍
    I love this pod :)
    This is one of my fav pods I like to listen to it in the background when I draw . I want to learn more about the economy and how to prevent inflation and other economical issues :D Also I do saw the other reviews. I wasn’t paying too much attention but based on others’ opinions, perhaps you could address this?
  • yc1026395
    Aweful Ozempic episode
    I feel compelled to write a review after listening to the Ozempic episode from the Journal, which I usually enjoy. One of the hosts (Wendy) seems to be on a drug herself, laughing uncontrollably and saying “interesting” in a condescending manner. It’s disgusting and completely unprofessional. What’s wrong with her and what happened to quality control at the WSJ??
  • pjagc
    Best produced podcast out there! Fantastic flow, sound and content.
  • Hubbell16
    Unprofessional Switch on Ozempic
    I listen to all of WSJ podcasts consistently, but I’m unsubscribing from the Journal because of the last episode with Ozempic. The hosts were highly unprofessional, not bringing evidence (instead they cherry picked stories), giggling about real user reviews of a drug that’s causing serious and real side effects. Makes you wonder if the drug company is sponsoring this episode.
  • Rolo Tomassey
    Good Show
    Well made and informative. Thanks!
  • H&F are the best
    The last episode on Ozempic was awful. If I want to hear two little girls giggling I’d go to a playground. Please don’t link to these other much lower quality podcasts again.
  • NativeVirginian
    The Ozempic episode was childish
    The cheesy dialogue and giggling in this episode was so far from what I’ve come to expect from the WSJ, I had to double check that it was a Journal production. It felt like a desperate attempt to reach a younger audience but was instead awkward and cringy. Please maintain the WSJ standard with the WSJ brand or retitle these cheesy productions so we’re not subjected to this childish treatment.
  • RogerThat
    Decent Content. Unbearable Talent.
    As with many WSJ Podcasts, the content and information is top-notch. But when it comes to their talent, it’s a total misfire. This is a prime example. While I’m sure Wendy Zukerman is a delight in person, however the tone of her voice and her delivery make the Science vs. Ozempic episode unbearable. Another annoying aspect to the Science vs. Ozempic episode is how lightly the subject matter is taken. In one moment they’re nonchalantly dismissing the topic of suicide ideation and in the next they’re giggling and joking about bowel movements like 12 year-old school children. Please WSJ, place as much emphasis on your talent acquisitions as you do your journalism. Between this and the SBF coverage, I feel like I’m listening to podcast series produced by American junior high school cheerleaders.
  • wammack6
    Unprofessional host for Ozempic Episodes
    Laughing and making gross jokes while talking about people who have suffered from the side effects of this medication came across as both unprofessional and mean. Disappointing behavior from the hosts.
  • isbwowjbdb
    Too much giggling and chit chat
    I really wanted to learn more about Ozempic and this class of meds, but the interview format and voices were annoying. Very hard to follow the thread of information when it sounds like it’s not serious. I had to cut it off after 10 minutes or so.
  • BDS 2012
    Latest episode was weird (& poorly executed) turn for WSJ
    Listened to the latest episode re weight loss drugs and unsubscribed. Was so irritating to listen to what sounded like sound reporting constantly interrupted by a poor attempt at a sarcastic comedy routine. So so bad. Unsubscribed mostly from pure irritation.
  • Brcret
    Great podcast for the morning commute. Quick and relevant news stories. Both hosts do an excellent job.
  • Siwells
    Science vs ozempic
    Terrible hosts and the episode is unlistenable. Instead of actually telling the story, which would have been interesting, it’s just the two hosts telling corny jokes to each other and laughing at themselves. People listen to the podcast because they want to hear the story, not because they are in love with the story teller.
  • vdoman
    Science vs Ozempic laugh riot
    I’ve listened for years to WSJ The Journal. Never have I experienced a more disgusting episode than this one. It was like listening to two twenty-somethings, with glasses of wine, joking and laughing about immigrants. Weight loss is a serious subject. I’ve been listening to this series intently. Then this immature host, who steered the guest into a joking festival, just disrespected everyone who has worked so hard on this. When halfway through, the “Chew chew” and laughter came on, I had to give up. Congratulations to the editor and producers who approved this abomination. You have certainly lost my respect.
  • B. Chen Zhu
    Ozempic episode—strange tone
    Love this podcast usually, but the crazed laughing and unprofessional tone of the recent Ozempic episode is really off brand…
  • SamanthaJD
    Save Your Ears, and 40 Minutes of Your Life!
    I am an avid listener to The Journal podcasts, but had to leave this review on the May 26, 2024 debacle. It was like listening to 2 tweens get ahold of their parents’ podcasting equipment and then giggling and making fart jokes for 40 minutes. Yes, there was definitely some good content hidden in the horrible delivery of the Ozempic info, but I am writing to give feedback to the higher-ups who hopefully read this and realize that the dumbing down on hosts isn’t what these listeners/subscribers are interested it. I LOVE the WSJ podcasts otherwise, and will gladly be listening to future ones…please boot THESE hosts from future episodes.
  • UB Boy
    Grow up!
    The Ozempic episode reminded me of when I was 14 and had a tape recorder and my friends, and I would just goof off and say silly stuff to music together. I don’t see myself as particularly bothered by irreverence, but I think this episode descended into you a real pit of sophomoric behavior.
  • .jcw.
    These are journalists?
    The episode on the effects of weight loss drugs was a disgrace. Apparently, Wendy and Rose find people’s pain and suffering uproariously funny.
  • WSJ Ling term Listener
    Science vs
    utterly insufferable / so unlike your other excellent shows / 20% of the show is middle school banter / awful
  • TAstrong
    Wendy - pl don’t bring her!
    This episode on Ozempic was great reporting by Rose! Loved the depth of details and the sequence was easy to follow! The the co reporters Wendi was annoying and she constantly laughing and taking away from the key part of the discussion was distracting and honestly frustrating. Pl have reporters who care enough about the topic report on it! Otherwise love this show and I don’t go without a day listening to the journal!
  • textav
    Ozempic episode
    Interesting topic totally spoiled by the cackling laughing of the presenter, who was totally unfunny.
  • T1D Strong
    I’m sorry, but even though normally I enjoy the Journal, I seriously can’t deal with the host of science vs ozempic — my friend, laughing really hard at stupid stuff doesn’t make it funny. Please stop. Just like I’m stopping this episode and moving to something else.
  • ZataRW
    Thanks for showing the brains of Paris Hilton. And who she choose as a partner. Together.
  • mvpdodger15
    Quick and to the point
    I love this show, but hate the news, yet this show is news with good highlights and minimal bias. The reporters, Kate and Ryan are one of my favorite. I recommend for anyone that wants a quick glimpse of important news without stupidity and fluff. I also like that sometimes they present fun topics like the taco Tuesday story, that was good. Overall I love it.
  • TaniaMiami
    Forever War
    This is the first time I feel that The Journal is not objective and instead takes a side. Your ending stating that a cease fire is the only way to attain peace in the Middle East does not take into account that ending the war now would leave Hamas in power to continue to pursue its clear goal to destroy the State of Israel. I am not sure how you can miss that logic
  • leviticus2016
    The New NPR
    I love the Potomac Watch podcast; good reliable information. The news side of the WSJ has become the new NPR ( except for support by my tax dollars). Obviously biased reporting. One fact I did gleen was an MB comment: “I am one the elites.”. Said in jest but oh so true.
  • VocalFried
    Okay reporting, terrible listening experience
    Too often, these episodes cover content in WSJ without adding much value. And far too often, the reporters invited to speak are nasal, grating, vocal frying…they just aren’t someone I want to listen to for 15-20 minutes. They have voices well suited to print media and it shows.
  • NeverBored.
    Never miss this podcast
    Fantastic reporting
  • B3lG3
    Good podcast but
    I listen to these pretty religiously. However theres reporter with a bad accent/nasally and make it unable to finish.
  • Ads only?
    After Many Years, No Longer News
    Have listened to this daily since it was started years ago. Long form investigative journalism was refreshing. Over the years, it has folded into typical corporate network news with less and less actual reporting. What is less is explicit biased opinions and agendas presented as “news”. Fortunately, there are a lot of new outlets and mediums that offer fact based journalism without the now explicit bias of this podcast.
  • Jrboho
    Why is WSJ reporting on rumors?
    Why are you reporting that Trump wants to set interest rates? By your own admission on the podcast episode this is nothing but a rumor. Shame on you. So disappointing- Truly no outlet can be trusted to be impartial these days.
  • Scot2944
    Are you looking into the possibility that these are centrally planned by Hamas sympathizers in America and that there’s funded by possibly Hamas or Iran directly? Is anybody looking into that?
  • RegularGuy7
    Would be 5 but politics
    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.
  • Case135
    Great podcast but
    It’s no longer showing up in my feed. Is it discontinued? It shows up in the WSJ link but no longer updates or downloads.
  • 212134345656
  • JonfromNy
    Very uninformative
    I try to listen but I feel you don’t put enough effort into this. In recent episode on WNBA you say “I think it was a $75mm investment”. It’s widely known and reported. Why aren’t you more informed and besides speaking to a few boys who played with Caitlin Clark years ago what else did you do or report we don’t already know
  • Hopeful🦋
    No content🤷‍♀️🤷‍♀️🤷‍♀️
    I downloaded the wsj app but it says "no episodes".
  • The Journal fan
    Great podcast!
    I’m a subscriber to the print version of the WSJ but this podcast remains on top of my daily listening queue. Has it been discontinued? Haven’t been able to find a new episode to download for awhile.
  • Deeeeeedubya
    Who me?
    You wanna learn about the passive voice, this is your show. Total dereliction of journalistic duty when it comes to reporting the facts. Shameless government propaganda.
  • Camija
    Best podcast
    This is the best podcast in economy and business. Well explained and relevant content.
Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork on this page are property of the podcast owner, and not endorsed by