Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Cenk @ Huffington Post: The Real Problem with CNBC

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
ihavenobias Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 07:57 AM
Original message
Cenk @ Huffington Post: The Real Problem with CNBC

By Cenk Uygur

I know that Jon Stewart and Jim Cramer have been in a bit of a lately. Of course, it's not really a fight because Stewart isn't doing this to pick a fight with Cramer or because he doesn't like him. He's making fun of him - because that's what he does.

Stewart also makes fun of Obama from time to time (check out him ripping Obama ). Does this mean he doesn't like Obama? No, it means he's a comedian. Over the last couple of days Cramer and Joe Scarborough have been using that word as a pejorative, but that's the guy's job - to make people laugh. They are pissed because he's good at it.

But if they think there is a kernel of truth in what Stewart is saying - which, of course, is why they're actually angry - they're right. Stewart also wants to make you think about what the role of the media is. And when you think about that in regard to CNBC, Jim Cramer is the least of their problems.

In fact, I don't blame Cramer at all (disclaimer: he's been and I had a friendly interaction with him personally once). Everybody knows what Cramer does - he yells and screams about his stock predictions. That's his job. You'd have to be crazy to think Cramer knows everything and that you should invest all of your money purely based on what he says. And I think he would be the first to admit that.

That's not the problem with CNBC. The real problem is their reporting - or lack thereof. The CNBC reporters and anchors make the Bush press corps look like draconian inquisitors. They are . This is a problem with all of the media, and something Jon Stewart points out all the time. But it is particularly acute at CNBC (and all other business news channels).

I have a close friend who works at a business news station - and here is the worst kept secret in show business - it's all about the access. If you piss off the CEOs or the companies, you're going to get a call from your boss. You have jeopardized our relationship with them!

That is very thinly disguised code words for - don't ever say anything negative about a company we cover otherwise your job is in the trouble. The message is clear - go along to get along. This isn't journalism. It's public relations by another name.

CNBC never did any exposes about the enormous risks these financial companies took. They never exposed the insanity of the derivatives market. And they never told their audience that . Because they didn't see that as their job. They saw their job as doing whatever it took to keep Wall Street happy and playing ball with them.

They were part of the broken system. There was no journalism going on at CNBC. That is what our underlying complaint is. That is what CNBC continues to miss to this day as they try to defend themselves by saying their words were taken out of context. The problem was the context!...

.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 08:01 AM
Response to Original message
1. Well put - and that can be said of other networks too!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ihavenobias Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 09:42 AM
Response to Reply #1
11. Sad but true.
And as Cenk said, it's especially true of business networks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wetzelbill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 08:04 AM
Response to Original message
2. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
havocmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 08:05 AM
Response to Original message
3. Great stuff
thanks for posting
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ihavenobias Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 12:27 PM
Response to Reply #3
20. Thanks, glad you liked it. I just checked and it's currently the #1 rated diary at DailyKos.
Those Kos folks have good taste sometimes.

;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pleah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 08:06 AM
Response to Original message
4. K&R
:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RandomThoughts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 08:11 AM
Response to Original message
5. This is a possibility
When enough people listened to CNBC they were given the ability to create self fulfilling predictions. Some of these probably to help groups or individuals that might use rumors to move something up or down.

Now that the credibility of CNBC is down, there lack of ability to just move things around by saying it also further diminishes there credibility. Now they have to get it right based on other herders, or maybe, actual market realities, not just pushing bubbles or methods of creating wealth.

It all goes back to people having power if people think they do, CNBC, and Cramer have a herd, because they were able to effect the movements of enough people. Because those people gave them that power by listening to what they said.

I think what can be learned is how herd mentality and respect and credibility is what creates the power of those that, for whatever reason, speak for a group of people.

I think one quote of a billionaire was, 'let the blockheads listen to the blockheads', I think CNBC might be part of that quote.

I also agree with Jon Stewart that replacing God with Cramer, in that one splash screen, just was not that bright at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Supersedeas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-12-09 08:11 AM
Response to Reply #5
36. yep
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mod mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 08:20 AM
Response to Original message
6. CNBC never did any exposes about the enormous risks these financial companies took
There lies why JS should go after them, as "experts". They were negligent in their media role.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fleshdancer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 08:21 AM
Response to Original message
7. I agree that CNBC was part of the problem...
which is why it angers me so much when they throw all the blame on Obama and the homeowner while giving the corporations a free pass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ihavenobias Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 06:03 PM
Response to Reply #7
27. Amen to that.
As you say, that's ON TOP of giving bad financial advice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mt13 Donating Member (281 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 08:32 AM
Response to Original message
8. K&R! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Auggie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 08:35 AM
Response to Original message
9. GE is in the ratings business, not the news business.
It's about the bottom line -- ratings, ad revenue, and their quarterly dividend. They'll broadcast anything if it makes money.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 09:45 AM
Response to Reply #9
13. They are in the 'gaming the ref' (formerly lobbying and PR) business.
Ratings are at most a sideline.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Auggie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #13
15. How about, "They're in the money making business?"
That should apply to everything
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ihavenobias Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 06:57 PM
Response to Reply #15
28. So true.
I can see the bumper stickers and t-shirts now.

:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-12-09 12:01 AM
Response to Reply #15
34. ratings and advertising pale in comparison to the $$ they can rake in with the results from lobbying
Edited on Thu Mar-12-09 12:03 AM by glitch
lobbying via the megaphone that is the corporate media, that is -- until the market collapses from lobby-induced runaway "capitalism" and deregulation.

Believe it or not it is an important distinction. They didn't buy the corporate media for the advertising $$, they bought it for the wurlitzer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yellerpup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 08:47 AM
Response to Original message
10. That access thing--he's so right about it.
Look what happened to CBS after Dan Rather pissed of Papa Bush after Chimpy was not elected. Corporate asses are worse than anyone because they always play to a captive audience. The last time I worked for a corporation, you'd think we were in the presence of a god when the guy with the fattest numbers on his W2 walked down the hall. To me that is just a reason to be suspicious of him, not a reason to admire. (No, I didn't last long -- I don't have the right set of values.) K&R!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Tires Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 09:44 AM
Response to Original message
12. just what i thought all along...ACCESS
CNBC and those Hollywood reporters have more in common than they think
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elizfeelinggreat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 09:46 AM
Response to Original message
14. A great argument for diversification!
Thanks for the link.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
20score Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 10:56 AM
Response to Original message
16. Very good. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OhioChick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 11:07 AM
Response to Original message
17. K&R
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kajsa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 11:11 AM
Response to Original message
18. Cenk nailed it, again!
" The real problem is their reporting - or lack thereof."

That says it all.

:applause:

:kick: and R.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
matthewf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 11:41 AM
Response to Original message
19. k&r
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Supersedeas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 01:05 PM
Response to Original message
21. part of a broken system of journalism that caters to interested advertisers
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FiveGoodMen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 01:54 PM
Response to Original message
22. Just off the top of my head...
If reporters went after stories -- doing their own investigation rather than being spoon-fed with press releases -- then they wouldn't really need access.

When they had their facts together, they could call the company involved and say, "I'm about to print a story that says you were cheating your investors out of millions of dollars in violation of state and federal law. Care to comment?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ihavenobias Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 08:23 PM
Response to Reply #22
31. Wes Clark Jr made a great point to that end.
He basically said that news sucks because it's much cheaper to NOT do an investigative reporting. That's why so many dumb issues make news.

Plus they don't rock the political boat so it's a double-win.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Seldona Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 02:28 PM
Response to Original message
23. Cramer will land on his feet, the puke.
All he needs is some clown makeup and he has a children show already.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ihavenobias Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 10:59 PM
Response to Reply #23
33. Ah hah!
THAT explains why he had those CEO's throwing ping pong balls into those buckets for a shot at a crisp $100!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GinaMaria Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 02:49 PM
Response to Original message
24. that pretty much sums it up eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ejbr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 03:11 PM
Response to Original message
25. and there you have it n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CherylK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 05:10 PM
Response to Original message
26. K & R!!!
:applause:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
malaise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 07:00 PM
Response to Original message
29. Super article
There is absolutely no journalism on GECNBC.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 07:07 PM
Response to Original message
30. On point
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OhioChick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 09:43 PM
Response to Original message
32. Evening Kick!
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bread and Circus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-12-09 12:10 AM
Response to Original message
35. I love Cenk. The guy cuts to chase quickly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ihavenobias Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-12-09 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #35
37. Hopefully there will be some good MSNBC news very soon. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pam4water Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-13-09 12:12 AM
Response to Original message
38. Stewart said that himself, tonight and Cramer wasn't the focus of the
original piece. To say that he was is over simplifying what Stewart said. The idiots in the MSM may has take that position I don't regualry watch MSM anymore so I dunno.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ihavenobias Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-13-09 06:23 PM
Response to Reply #38
39. I'm getting ready to watch the Cramer Vs. Stewart segment.
This should be good!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CherylK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-14-09 12:02 PM
Response to Original message
40. Bump!
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 05:08 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC