Please provide current Wall Street Journal articles $($Titles and links$)$:

A host of empirical evidence indicates that the gains from a typical merger accrue to the shareholders of the target corporation, not to the shareholders of the acquiring corporation. It seems the acquiring corporation should be in the "driver's seat" in a typical merger. Why do shareholders not benefit? What do you think typically goes wrong to cause this result? Research the Wall Street Journal, and cite a specific example to support your position.