The Wall Street Journal has been preparing big-time for the launch of its new weekend edition on September 17. A brief item in Tuesday's print edition tipped us off that the company BreakingViews will be supplying financial news and opinions for the WSJ Weekend Edition. (In fact, it looks like a larger collaboration might be involved -- a week or two ago, I remember seeing an op-ed piece on hedge funds from a BreakingViews contributor).

Here's the tagline from the BreakingViews Web site:

"Breakingviews leads the way in international financial commentary. Where other websites provide only news, we bring you views: pithy, sophisticated opinion on the top financial stories, as they break. Now we're bringing our unique brand of journalism to America, with a dedicated US edition launching at the end of the year... At a time when people are being deluged with information, breakingviews cuts to the chase. Short, punchy articles. Real-time analysis, delivered while the markets are still open. And above all – views, not news.

There are a few other plugs on the company's site touting "real-time comment on the big US and global stories" and "agenda-setting commentary." Of course, it's all hidden behind subscription walls, so most bloggers and Internet surfers are probably blissfully unaware of the existence of the company.

Without taking anything away from BreakingViews (maybe it's my deep-seated inferiority complex when it comes to the Brits), is this type of "real-time commentary" anything different than what's supplied by the various Corante contributors or by other bloggers? Don't bloggers provide "real-time comment" and try to create "agenda-setting commentary"? Bloggers provide views, not news, so what's so achingly different about BreakingViews? Is the Wall Street Journal afraid to call a blog a blog?