Cramer vs. Cramer

I think Megan McArdle's pox-on-both-houses take on Stewart's evisceration of Jim Cramer is pretty unfair. Nobody has to like Jon Stewart, or what he does. But we should be clear about what he does and doesn't do. What he doesn't do--at times like this when he largely drops the shtick and holds someone's feet to the fire--is mislead people. Jim Cramer didn't feel like Stewart was misleading anybody. All he could do was apologize for his failings and those of his network. But Megan still takes issue. She wirtes:

[T]he Jon Stewart video that touched this off was clearly misleading. I do watch these channels, not for the interview but for the tickers and the breaking financial news. And it was obvious from the clips that half of them were anchors and reporters simply quoting someone else--it's the equivalent of dinging someone for using a racial epithet in the context of discussing racial epithets.

Decide for yourself:

I think you see a mix of things happening in that clip. There's some terrible financial voodoo-punditry (of course AIG won't need a bailout, etc.) folded into some uncritical recapitulation of the untrue things financial experts were telling supposed journalists. But even if there was none of the former and more of the latter, it doesn't absolve anybody of anything. And that's one of Stewart's most damning points. This is about violation of trust much more than it is about who's a charlatan vs. who's just a lazy reporter.

In that sense, Megan's analogy to racial epithets is way off base. What we need is an analogy to Judith Miller: If as a reporter, you knowingly and uncritically pass on the lies that powerful people tell you, you're contributing to the problem. CNBC pretends to be a news network, but it fails in its task because it puts soothsayers and stenographers and corrupt insiders on the air, and that's the point Stewart's always made. Jim Cramer's taking the fall because he happens to be the network's biggest star.

Comments

And that's why no one listens to McMegan.

Posted by: AHG on March 13, 2009 03:48 PM

No one except her thousands of readers.

Posted by: Brian Beutler on March 13, 2009 04:16 PM

Yes, sharply put. I just read McArdle's post and didn't get where she was coming from. Stewart was NOT asking about racist argot and then jumping on them for discussing it. Not at all.

Your articulation of the better analogy - Judith Miller - is exactly right. Hallelujah.

Judy Miller did not (we think) deliberately lie but the real crime is her abdication of professional duty, to check shit out! Cramer did the same thing in his turf.

Megan - I just don't get what the hell she was trying to say. Plus Cramer's fulminating and all the rest is clearly wrong and simply not taken out of context.

I too wondered, if Stewart were making such elementary mistakes, why Cramer would've just looked at him like "Huh? What are you talking about?" Instead, Cramer's whole demeanor was that of the penitent. wtf, Megan?

Posted by: tor on March 13, 2009 04:28 PM

In reading MM's post, I just got the feeling that Jon Stewart's whole point just sailed right past her (I'd say, "went over her head," but she's always making a point about how tall she is). You bolded just exactly the right passage above, and I agree that the Judith Miller analogy is correct. Well said!

Posted by: ajw_93 on March 13, 2009 04:40 PM

No one except her thousands of readers.

Unfortunately enough. McMegan is a fraud and a buffoon.

Posted by: ed on March 13, 2009 06:51 PM

Megan McArdle is a pseudo-intellectual libertarian who uses Enron math and revisionist history to push right wing talking points.

McArdle's sophomoric quibbles are designed to masquerade as thoughtful analysis even as they distract and detract from substantive issues.

She's apologizing for corporate voice puppets masquerading as financial journalists while at the same time attacking an entertainer for what? Entertaining??

Ultimately McArdle's real complaint with Jon Stewart is that he's the court jester revealing con artists like Cramer that right wing ideologues like McArdle are hired to protect.

At best McArdle's a CATO/Randian clown. At worst, she's a regular embarrassment to The Atlantic. Apparently McArdle is The Atlantic's investment in their wing nut welfare division.

The creepy part is that she clearly has a choir of "yes" boys lapping up her nonsense. Creepier still is how many of her admirers are giving a full throated, boot licking defense of both Cramer and CNBC, the same Cramer and CNBC whose corporate sycophancy cheered on the greatest economic disaster in 80 years.

Stewart puts on videotape of CRAMER CONFIDING HE MANIPULATED THE MARKET and the free-market predators over a Megan "Jane Galt" McArdles blog become enraged at a COMEDIAN?

Could we buy her and her Chicago Boyz Choir all one way tickets to Galt's Gulch?

Posted by: News Reference on March 13, 2009 09:10 PM

While I enjoy watching Cramer every night, one must remember the show is primarily entertainment. The financial networks exist to promote their advertisers financial and investment products. Who would expect them to warn about the credit bubble or coming Washington national debt collapse which will destroy much of the remaining private wealth in America today or what this will do to the dollar, the stock market, bonds, gold or the real estate market?


China is now worried about their dangerous over investment in US Treasury obligations. Washington ’s long-term choice is either repudiation or monetization. For monetization to be effective, the depreciation in the dollar would have to be substantial and this in turn would dramatically raise prices of imports for American consumers which would mean a tremendous drop in foreign imports. Debt monetization would cause more disruption to exporting nations than selective repudiation of Treasury debt.

The Campaign to Cancel the Washington National Debt By 12/22/2013 Constitutional Amendment is starting now in the U.S. See: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=67594690498&ref=ts

Thanks,

Ron with 30 plus years in the investment business and banking industry.

Posted by: Ron on March 14, 2009 03:14 PM

teşekkürler...:) very much

Posted by: neon on June 3, 2009 05:41 PM

god film movies site

Posted by: film izle on October 26, 2009 10:44 AM

saol admin

Posted by: film izle on October 26, 2009 10:44 AM

gel bahçe ekelim senle admin

Posted by: garden guides on November 18, 2009 06:32 PM

film izle gel burada

Posted by: film izle on November 18, 2009 06:38 PM

film izleyelim

Posted by: film izle on November 18, 2009 06:45 PM

film izlesek

Posted by: film izle on November 18, 2009 06:56 PM

oyun oyna

Posted by: oyun on November 18, 2009 07:04 PM

klip izle

Posted by: klip izle on November 18, 2009 07:10 PM

And they have placed trust in the government not just to fix the economy but to do so with minimal waste and, more importantly, in a way that destroys--not reinforces--the culture of rot that created the crisis in the first place. Collectively they have the power to take that trust away, and while that might spell economic doom for all of us, they might understandably (or rightly) conclude that the government's blowing it anyway, so why waste the extra few hundred billion dollars. http://www.watchgy.com/
http://www.watchgy.com/tag-heuer-c-24.html/

Posted by: replica rolex on November 23, 2009 04:02 AM

Post A Comment