The Wall Street Journal Sucks Customer Reviews and Feedback

From Everything.Sucks

The Wall Street Journal (also known as The Journal) is an American business-focused, English-language international daily newspaper based in New York City, with international editions also available in Chinese and Japanese. The Journal, along with its Asian editions, is published six days a week by Dow Jones & Company, a division of News Corp. The newspaper is published in the broadsheet format and online. The Journal has been printed continuously since its inception on July 8, 1889, by Charles Dow, Edward Jones, and Charles Bergstresser.

On May 2020, Shanon M. from YELP wrote an opinion of The Wall Street Journal's customer service:

"Horrible. I began a 2-month subscription on the evening of March 15 and was told I have until May 15th to cancel, as the subscription would kick on May 16th. I was billed the morning of the 15th, called to have this corrected, and let them know about my conversation with someone March 15th. They said their policy doesn't allow returns, but if I prolonged my subscription they would give me a discount. I wanted to speak to a supervisor, but they were "unable" to find one. Their customer service reps are absolutely terrible for one, in turn making their customer service in general absolute trash. It's impossible to send an email, or get a hold of anyone stateside."


Tell the world why The Wall Street Journal sucks!

I certify that this review is based on my own experiece and is my opinion of this person or business. I have not been offered any incentive or payment to write this review.


Enter Code

Former Employee - Case Manager says

"Too much work And zero work life balance"

Former Employee - Audio/Video Team Employee says

"Surprisingly disappointing. I so badly wanted this job to be good, but the consistent lack of communication, scare tactics, and denial made this job impossible. I was constantly afraid because everyone was so ready to blame everyone else for something going wrong. Although there are some union positions, the union is like a dog with no teeth. People are constantly being taken advantage of by having to work more hours then they are contracted to, and then not getting compensated for them because they are severely understaffed. Don't work in the audio or video department because you will quickly realize that upper management have no idea the effort it takes to create quality content."

Former Employee - Administrative Assistant says

"poor management, as a result there is high turnover. Lack of job stability-industry is on the decline. Noisy environment with little respect to others."

Former Employee - Anonymous Employee says

"Extremely political organization, no mobility. Total lack of transparency. Execs will say one thing and do something else. As soon as I arrived, I realized how much the company lacked in terms of values. Lack of diversity."

Current Employee - Anonymous Employee says

"Under-qualified management riding on the talents of their underlings. Favoritism. Poor direction. Moves at a glacial pace."

Former Employee - Anonymous Employee says

"no love for the customer - they've lost their way"

Current Employee - Anonymous Employee says

"Company is stuck in the 80s on just about every level: infrastructure, office style and furnishings, supplies, hierarchic management style with too many mid-level managers without any empowerment. From product perspective, WSJ is way behind the times and trying to catch up to competition. It will not catch up to the competition because WSJ lacks the vision and resources to pull it off."

Current Employee - Product Manager says

"The journal has great people but terrible infrastructure. Like any incredibly vertically integrated company none of the systems talk to each other and the business is left to suffer. The organization is old and so is it's thinking."

Former Employee - Anonymous Employee says

"Management team is the least qualified I've ever encountered. Cronyism was rampant at the executive level evidenced by an executive team that is nearly all British. Senior managers had ownership, but no accountability. When something went wrong, they just blamed another team (or members or their own team). Attrition was off the charts and overall employee morale was abysmal."

Former Employee - Anonymous Employee says

"That being said, here are a handful of reasons to NEVER work there: -no training whatsoever -extremely understaffed, so no one even has time to look over the work they send in. you will be overworked for little pay -sales and marketing are constantly bickering about each other. they are even separated by two floors -the technology is old and unreliable -the entire department is extremely unorganized and you will spend a fair amount of your time looking through a bootlegged version of a cloud storage system for the most simple materials -the retention rate of employees is only a few years -it is an unhappy and stressful environment -there is very little room to move up I guarantee that in five years, the majority of the marketing sales department will have an entirely new staff. Hopefully you will not be among them."

Journalist/Editor (Former Employee) says

"No allowance for creative flair, bullying of staff by managers was overlooked. Workplace culture was one of general misery. Many employees were afraid of their line managers due to the unreasonable demands they made and also their rudeness."

Contractor (Former Employee) says

"The CEO had a manager position available, he had someone come in for an interview and the man walked out crying hysterically. The Ceo later said in a company wide meeting that situation was awkward. Meanwhile he made him cry. Terrible place to work."

Marketing Director (Current Employee) says

"The WSJ has quite simply become a bad place to work as it pertains to the business units in the NY office. It has a rotating door of employees at all levels because of poor management, lack of opportunity/promotion and low pay. Annual raises are typically 2% and occasionally skipped altogether. Management are primarily of one of two varieties, the unqualified but knew someone or, inexperienced with a high job title given because they would accept low pay. HR operates in a bubble with blinders on either unable or unwilling to see what is going on beyond their desk. It is truly astonishing what goes on in this company and somehow it remains afloat in spite of how it operates. I attribute it to a strong brand name and some talent on the editorial side. The type of person who should consider working here is someone looking to get a well known marquee brand on their resume and use it as a stepping stone to go to another company. In fact, that is what most people do and why the average tenure is about a year across most business units. It does provide 3 weeks vacation, plus one week personal days to start, so it does have that going for it.Famous company name, better than average vacation timelow pay, low/no raises, bad management, poor working conditions/facilities"

Video Journalist (Former Employee) says

"Some co-workers are friendly, but overall not a lot of room for career growth. The unit has experienced growing pains and some have felt that being staff is less lucrative than being a freelancer."

White House Correspondent (Former Employee) says

"Like most newspapers, the WSJ doesn't really know how to manage people. That's a problem that likely won't be fixed overnight. Still, the people who do work there (including the managers) are good people.FunManagement"

Global Digital Sales Associate (Former Employee) says

"While The Wall Street Journal will always remain a household brand, the ad sales environment is destructive to not only careers but the environment around. There needs to be a positive shakeup in order for anything different to change.benefits"

Photographer (Former Employee) says

"Assignments include covering breaking news, spot news politics, sports and the arts. File images under on site and on deadline and in a timely manner."

Sales Associate (Former Employee) says

"This company goes through so many different changes. Two different CEOs within three years. This resulted in waves of layoffs."

Reporter/Editor (Former Employee) says

"Being a journalist requires giving up on work/life balance. It was grueling, but I reckon that is the case at every media organization grappling with revamping their business model to cope in the 21st Century.Smart, talented colleaguesLong hours, no overtime, promoting middle management for saying yes to every request rather than on talent alone."

Project Manager (Current Employee) says

"The company at the current time has no idea what it is doing or what direction it needs to go in. Upper management is too vague and reluctant to commit to any purpose, atlases one that is transparent to the company itself.good offices, easy to get to trains"

Audio Engineer (Current Employee) says

"The notoriety of the paper overshadows the fact that it is trying to thrive in a digital world. While some of the younger employees have great creative minds and can serve well in this digital age. It is the older reporters that need to be convinced in order to show off the young fresh image of today.Great BenefitsNo set workflows"


"The WSJ continues to produce an excellent journalism product despite heavy-handed editing and poor management. Individual journalists are not given enough space to work within their area of expertise and the editing process is clunky and inefficient."

Account Manager, Sales (Current Employee) says

"The Wall Street Journal is an excellent brand. The news and information industry, however, is undergoing a business model change and the security and advancement opportunities are limited.client entertainment benefits include tickets to games and concertswork environment lacks a pillar of trust"

Asst. Foreman (Former Employee) says

"A typical day at work was hitting the floor and running as soon as we got there. We have been short handed for a long time and we had tight dispatches. We would setup for the nights run. After set up we would have to put plates on. The time period from the start of shift and the start of press run was 2 and half hours. I was an asst foreman and had to monitor the plate flow and make sure that things ran smoothly. The hardest part of the job was not getting behind schedule. The best part of the job was the people that i worked with.the peopleshort handed"

Sales Representative (Former Employee) says

"Retired ! Great location great people terrible management not based upon production , but rather who you knew in a previous job ! Manager was an empty suit who was more interested in pleasing management than building revenue and establishing long lasting strategic relationships!"

news paper carrier (Former Employee) says

"newspaper companies are a dissipating income with budget cuts and lay offs and lack of new subscriptions . It is no longer a viable income job. The carriers and the manager were very nice"

Advertising Coordinator (Former Employee) says

"Individual directors were great with team, however there are some issues some older school people there who don't have great temperament. When something small goes wrong people lose their minds, instead of saying moving forward we can do etc. There are client entertainment benefits, including tickets to games and concerts lunch etc. But they do not often promote from within and are more likely to hire from outside the company.client entertainment benefitsDo not promote from within, hard opportunity to grow"

Aide comptable (Former Employee) says

"bonne ambiance de travail cadre agréable très peu de possibilités d'evolutionchèques repas élevémauvaise manière de poussé les employé vers la sortie afin d’évité de payé un préavis"

Customer Service Representative (Former Employee) says

"Good experience for my work history and very educational. Good customer service training.good work experience for my work historyno benefits always part time"

Coordinator (Current Employee) says

"I think The Wall Street Journal is a great place to start a career and allows you to become a well groomed professional. The atmosphere is professional yet fun."

Christopher says

"Sign up online for $1 but have to call to cancel then they try to upsell you for 10 minutes solid. Won't refund if you are a day late to cancel. Poor customer service"

Ivan says

"absolutely awful, deceitful business practices"

declan g says

"Need to call their service centre (no email or chat support) at a specific time and spend >30 minutes on the phone in order to cancel my automatically renewing subscription. This should be illegal."

Indi Xan says

"Do not get suckered into their online subscription service - they lure you with a $1.00 / month offer and then it goes up to $19.49 / month and they make it VERY DIFFICULT to cancel the subscription. You have to call in to cancel it, even if it is a digital subsciption you signed up for online. The content they deliver is average and you can get much better news from a variety of other papers for free or a fraction of the price - not worth the hassel or price." is a non-profit organization and communications forum for social activism. This website allows users a voice to share their point of view online about what sucks in the world.

We occasionally buy a dot sucks domain and point it at a specific page. We do this to bring awareness to our site and because, well, we love the dot sucks domain. If you ask us if we would sell the domain, our answer is simple. Absolutely not. We will give it to you.

If the domain pointing at this page inspires passion in you and you want to build a fuller site around it, you can have it. That’s right, we will simply give it to you. We want to promote more sites on the Internet where people can share their voices.

To make it as simple as possible for you to have this domain, simply take this Authorization Code to your favourite domain name registrar, and they can transfer it right to you.

AUTH CODE: REB:}\n7i_upg~J!

We are all about feedback. If you have some thoughts for us, you can email us at