Talkin Wall Street Journal Blues

The WSJ Online has long been cheered for its ability to charge and collect subscription fees, and for its heaps of information. I'm glad to fork over $10 per month. The site refreshes and reloads every few minutes with breaking news that often directly effects my investments in Big Business.
There are a couple Interface Issues to call out::

1. iFrame on homepage doesn't Auto-Reload. While the homepage refreshes itself--and timestamps itself, its right column iFrame, which contains each user's "My Journal," a personalized collection of links and news, does not. My "My Journal", lists certain stock prices. When I see the time stamp on the homepage, and then look at my stock list, I am inclined to assume I have the latest prices. The iFrame should reload. Also, the list of stocks should be Time Stamped as well. No reason this important piece of info should not be included atop EACH quote.
Example: "price as of 3:24pm"
Some other news sources just give the vague, relative "up to 15 minute delay." Useless. Just give me the time at which that info was collected so I can compare it to present:
Example: "Time is 3:24pm EST. Price as of 3:18pm EST"

The WSJ does give the time stamp when you search a company's quote. Just not in the "My Online Journal" portfolios.

**
The second 'issue' regards the online journal using the exact copy as the print version. It is common for the Editorial Board to refer to an accompanying column. They accomplish this, in print, with a parenthetical "See Above" or "See Below." Example: ("for more on why lower taxes are always best, see Mitch Wagner's piece above")

Ummm, hello? On the Internet, that is exactly the kind of reference that could be LINKED. The accompanying piece is not "above" or "below"--it simply is where it is, and can be goten to through a hyper link. By leaving it as is, the Online Journal turns the paper's helpful hint into a confusing challenge. Perhaps the Journal could hire someone to vet the articles for possible hyperlinks.

**

The third problem is a style 'issue.' At the top of each page, there is a link to see a Print Friendly version. This helpful feature is cleverly sponsored by "Toshiba" which apparently is hoping to make inroads in the printing 'space.' (Hey, good for them. Why desert an entire industry to HP just because HP is kicking butt. DONT give up!) Congrats to the WSJ account exec who brought in that deal... Anyhoo: the problem with the Print Version of a Page is that it needlessly includes some Elements that SHOULD NOT PRINT!!

Prime Example: Video Player. Many articles have an embedded Bright Cove video player to play a clip related to the 'piece.' If the user aims to Print the Piece, then she does not need to see a picture of a video player. This element should not be displayed.



Maybe the new owner of the WSJ will demand a new style sheet. Or, maybe the web team will insist on complete Independence from Ownership, as a condition for signing onto any deal. Yeah, that seems fair-- a CSS oversight committee.