U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
 
Old 09-30-2010, 05:33 AM
 
Location: US
22,365 posts, read 21,213,079 times
Reputation: 17539

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Authenticity View Post
I've been watching CNBC for about 12 years. In the last 3-4 years I have seen a distinct change in their coverage of the market.

Even Jim Cramer has become a kool-aid drinker since Jon Stewart undressed him on the Daily Show a while back. As a trader I find their information to be increasingly useless as it has become more political than informational.

Also, I remember a time when the CNBC hosts would facilitate a debate with people with opposing views rather than imposing their own personal opinions into the discussion. Larry Kudlow is a prime example of this.

Of course, none of this is really new to one who knows the history of the stock market going back to the 'bucket shops' of the early 20th century. The market has always sought out 'retail' investors and provided them with either misinformation or misdirection in order to separate them from their cash.

I am now beginning to watch Bloomberg, whom I think sticks more to the stock market information I need and want during the trading day. Just wondering if anyone else has noticed the change over at CNBC.
CNBC focuses on Wall Street. When the current president calls a war on Wall Street, do you expect them to say the political environment looks promising for a bull market? Make no mistake, I voted for Obama because there are more issues than just the markets. The economy I believe will recover eventually with either political party. It's like climate change. It goes in cycles, there are things you can do to slow or speed the process, but the end result will still be the same. I do believe Obama's policies are bad for the market, which explains why Cramer and others talk about his politics.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-30-2010, 05:39 AM
 
4,570 posts, read 3,227,134 times
Reputation: 2902
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmw335xi View Post
CNBC focuses on Wall Street. When the current president calls a war on Wall Street, do you expect them to say the political environment looks promising for a bull market? Make no mistake, I voted for Obama because there are more issues than just the markets. The economy I believe will recover eventually with either political party. It's like climate change. It goes in cycles, there are things you can do to slow or speed the process, but the end result will still be the same. I do believe Obama's policies are bad for the market, which explains why Cramer and others talk about his politics.
Well said!
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2010, 11:21 AM
 
Location: Chciago
721 posts, read 2,786,296 times
Reputation: 498
Quote:
Originally Posted by shaker281 View Post
Since the right wing is the preferred venue of the book burners and folks who threaten to boycott companies to get television shows canceled, it should be a concern! And the number of times I have seen valid data or scientific evidence denied, ad hominem, as the product of liberal media is disturbing.

But, to the original point, the only "liberal" view I can think of on CNBC on-air-staff would be Steve Liesman. There might be others, but none spring to mind. On the other hand you have a strong and vocal conservative viewpoint, including Larry Kudlow, Michele Caruso-Cabrera, Rick Santelli and many more.

I prefer my economic news untainted by political rhetoric of any kind.
Really, wasn't it hte libs who threw a fit over lou dobbs and tried to get all the advertisers to boycot his show b/c of his stance on illegal immigration?

Also, CNN and NBC both just fired their head honchos, zucker got fired and whateve rthe cnn guys name is got fired too. Guess people dotn like liberal spin on everything.

Also, I agree fox is slanted slightly conservative but no where near as far as CNN and MSNBC is to the left. There must be a reason why fox is the top news organization and cnn and msnbc are on their way out of business.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2010, 02:44 PM
 
706 posts, read 1,204,032 times
Reputation: 369
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdelena View Post
I agree, both CNBC and Bloomberg have been showing their left wing leanings while too much of Fox is biased to the right. It is too bad we can't have more balanced business reporting.
Fox is biased? Get out!~
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-01-2010, 11:55 AM
 
16 posts, read 17,323 times
Reputation: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamaicabound60565 View Post
Really, wasn't it hte libs who threw a fit over lou dobbs and tried to get all the advertisers to boycot his show b/c of his stance on illegal immigration?

Also, CNN and NBC both just fired their head honchos, zucker got fired and whateve rthe cnn guys name is got fired too. Guess people dotn like liberal spin on everything.

Also, I agree fox is slanted slightly conservative but no where near as far as CNN and MSNBC is to the left. There must be a reason why fox is the top news organization and cnn and msnbc are on their way out of business.
It is very, very obvious that you watch fox news regularly.

It seems completely insane for anyone to not see the bias all the televised media has. Whether it's left (Msn especially), or right (Faux News), it's there. You really have blown my mind with your comment. I thought the internet savvy were supposed to be in the whole 'the tv is a joke' thing.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-01-2010, 06:59 PM
 
2,592 posts, read 4,870,257 times
Reputation: 1943
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjcs996 View Post
It is very, very obvious that you watch fox news regularly.

It seems completely insane for anyone to not see the bias all the televised media has. Whether it's left (Msn especially), or right (Faux News), it's there. You really have blown my mind with your comment. I thought the internet savvy were supposed to be in the whole 'the tv is a joke' thing.
Anytime you have people you are going to have bias. The one nice thing whether you like Foxnews or not is that they will have two guests (one who argues one side and the other one for the opposite side). I check in on MSNBC and CNN once in awhile and a lot of the time they will have two liberals, one very liberal and they other person moderate to liberal.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2010, 04:22 AM
 
4,570 posts, read 3,227,134 times
Reputation: 2902
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamaicabound60565 View Post
Really, wasn't it hte libs who threw a fit over lou dobbs and tried to get all the advertisers to boycot his show b/c of his stance on illegal immigration?

Also, CNN and NBC both just fired their head honchos, zucker got fired and whateve rthe cnn guys name is got fired too. Guess people dotn like liberal spin on everything.

Also, I agree fox is slanted slightly conservative but no where near as far as CNN and MSNBC is to the left. There must be a reason why fox is the top news organization and cnn and msnbc are on their way out of business.
Slightly slanted conservative? let's see... how many of these can I string in a row?

Sure there are liberals who have taken a page from the right-wing playbook and begun letter writing campaigns over serious political issues. On the other hand, the right wing "family values" nuts will attempt to get fiction thrown off the air by threatening to boycott advertisers! That is modern day censorship, not simply expressing displeasure.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-10-2010, 11:47 PM
 
Location: Atlanta, GA
1,194 posts, read 1,915,510 times
Reputation: 816
Rick Santelli, Michelle Cabrera, left wing???

Steve Liesman is about the only moderate there.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-11-2010, 12:18 AM
 
Location: Wisconsin
23,564 posts, read 50,186,667 times
Reputation: 18221
Quote:
Originally Posted by shaker281 View Post
But, to the original point, the only "liberal" view I can think of on CNBC on-air-staff would be Steve Liesman. There might be others, but none spring to mind. On the other hand you have a strong and vocal conservative viewpoint, including Larry Kudlow, Michele Caruso-Cabrera, Rick Santelli and many more.
jdhtrico, he said conservative viewpoint for Santelli, Cabrera. I particularly can't stand either and switch the channel when they are on. I have yet to see what value Trish Regan or Cabrera contributes or that other female Brit who talks through her nose and who I can never understand.

The only female CNBC commentators I'll listen to are Erin Burnett, Sue Herrera and Maria Bartoromo.

So far this year, I have sent four emails to Kudlow when his blathering, shouting, talking over his guests, answering his own questions got to be too much. If there were other complaints also, that might account for his "toned down" demeanor.

John Harwood and Steve Liesman are at least rational. I also like Mark Haines. Actually, I lurv Mark Haines. He knows his stuff, talks sense and can really put his guests' feet to the fire. Wish he wasn't on so early in the day. Most days, I even don't get up until he's done.

I don't get Bloomberg news - but maybe next year when I upgrade my cable.

As far as faux news presenting both sides - not really. Any opposing views I've heard are so vanilla they are worthless. The station is a disgrace and, yet, its ratings are the highest. Says a lot about why this country is in the mess it's in. Well, as they say, we deserve the government we get.

Last edited by Ariadne22; 10-11-2010 at 12:33 AM..
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-11-2010, 01:43 PM
 
16,092 posts, read 37,974,281 times
Reputation: 6299
Is it biased to say that uncertainty on taxes is bad for current economic conditions?
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top