A few things stand out:
1) They don’t talk about the same events. The Bloomberg article focuses on blogs and blog coverage; the Journal talks about crime and homelessness rates. The Journal doesn’t even discuss the blogs Bloomberg addresses, and the incident rates the WSJ focuses on are a vague aftermention in Bloomberg.
2) Sarah Holder of Bloomberg wrote a much more in-depth article. The Journal editorial staff knocked out a 1 page op-ed.
3) Sarah Holder mentions Lincoln is black and Latino towards the end and leads with a picture of Tubbs. WSJ runs a similar lead and mentions Tubbs became the first black mayor, and youngest Stockton mayor ever, in the second paragraph. WSJ mentions Lincoln’s race and background a few paragraphs later. Those points are closer than in the Bloomberg story, but the article itself is much shorter.
4) I’m not sure if Bloombrg’s Citylab claims to be journalism or opinion. WSJ’s Opinion page is obviously opinion. I read each article as an argument in support of a clear thesis, the thesis largely to be expected from the partisan side associated.
I think this is a clear example that the different sides just don’t see the same world. They’re looking at tangential realities, ‘branes, or elemental planes that only rarely intersect.