Stewart Vs. Cramer

[RandomAnthony]

Now, I'm not a Jon Stewart junkie like some of you (you know who you are!) but I found this interaction quite interesting. I appreciate the fact Mr. Stewart called out the business media for being in bed with the corporations on which they report.

http://tv.msn.com/tv/article.aspx?new...

Thoughts?

[Kevin]

johnny boy sorta seemed like a real journalist in this eh?

[Cosmic Sher]

I think he was really pissed!

I loved that he didn't give Cramer an inch, and chastised him for not taking the responsibility of real journalism and checking out the facts! Maybe some of those darn networks will start paying attention to the fact that they can't just spew out any ol' information they want to. There might just be people who will take them to task on it.

I heart John S!

[Félix]

As do I.

[Sarah]

It's a shame that the only one practicing real journalism is a comedian. I love that he's allowed to get away with it.

[Kevin]

there are still repercussions today in the news as a result of this

[David]

The Stewart/Cramer interview was so awesome. If you haven't seen the unedited version, you can view it here:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/13...

Stewart punched him for a full 20 minutes, and they had to cut that down significantly for the show.

This reminds me of Stephen Colbert's keynote speech at the National Press Club, which has forever made him one of my heroes. As Sarah said, only comedians seem to have the guts to speak out to the face of power in a national forum. Journalists are no longer paid to investigate, they are hired to read copy, look pretty, act as PR for various corporate and political interests. They don't even know better. Do your job, don't ruffle feathers.

[shellyindallas]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/14/art...

Mr. Stewart treated his guest like a C.E.O. subpoenaed to testify before Congress: his point was not to hear Mr. Cramer out, but to act out a cathartic ritual of indignation and castigation.

[David]

That article had some validity, but it was also rather bulshitty. Plenty of great comedians have expressed anger in their routines. Sometimes the best comedy intertwines with tragedy. Bill Hicks and Lennie Bruce come to mind. The system gets riled up when funny people, who the general public loves (thus news folk are naturally jealous of them), speak out against power and do it within the entertainment system. Hence when Stephen Colbert called the President a liar to his face (in a very clever way) at the press club, a lot of news outlets described it as "distasteful" and "not funny."

Cramer will milk this for publicity? Morning Joe didn't talk about it afterward because Stewart nailed him to the wall. At least initially, Mad Money's ratings went down. Frankly, Cramer should be prosecuted for the manipulations he arrogantly described in the TheStreet.com clips. Stewart's team is more investigative than the mainstream press. Cramer claims you want a guy like him to report on stocks because he's like an ex-con. He's eliding the truth, which is that he's actually still a con artist.

When Mr. Cramer explained, “There is a market for it, and you give it to them,” Mr. Stewart stared at him in disbelief, exclaiming, “There’s a market for cocaine and hookers!” That is both tragic and hilarious. Bravo!

[Julie]

And maybe we need more people to do serious interviews(angry or not) instead of treating everyone like they were invited over for a tea party hosted by a bunch of kiss-asses.

[David]

Damn straight, Julie!

[Dave]

This post from the TPM blog makes an interesting point:

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/arch...

CNBC is actually not a news organization. They are not a part of the NBC News division. They are a network for Wall Street execs. So going after CNBC for not criticizing Wall Street more is like going after Lifetime, the network for women, for not criticizing women more. It's there target audience.

[David]

The analogy doesn't hold up. CNBC doesn't exist to provide news for Wall Street execs. It exists as a propaganda news provider on BEHALF of Wall street execs. It's more like Pravda was than Lifetime and thus is completely open to criticism as such.

[Dave]

But it's target audience is Wall Street execs. If it's providing propaganda it's providing it to them. Who watches CNBC other than business people?

[Félix]

Dave wrote: "Who watches CNBC other than business people?"

Common, ordinary investors.

[Dave]

Yeah, I suppose that's true. So on that basis they have a responsibility to provide more than cheerleading for Wall Street. That's a good point.

[David]

CNBC is often on the overhead TVs at my fitness club so that people on treadmills can watch it, along with other channels. Every morning, i see those folks babbling about the smallest twinges of the market.

When Cramer shouted, "Buy Bear Stearns," who was he promoting it to? Wall Street execs? The ones who knew Bear Stearns was going under or the ones who didn't? Was he hoping to prop up his friends at Bear Stearns at the expense of other Wall Street execs who didn't know they were going to collapse? Seems like it only acts as effective cheerleading if some poor sap is going to take your advice.

[RandomAnthony]

I don't buy the "CNBC isn't news and shouldn't have to live up to news standards" argument. It looks like a news channel. It sounds like a news channel. It presents itself as a valid informational source. CNBC should live up to the same standards as any other reputable news agency (although I'm afraid those standards might be pretty low, too).

I think one of the real silver linings to this economic meltdown is the fact that people are less likely to trust and, perhaps more importantly, more likely to question openly corporations and corporate culture. I could be overtly optimistic, but I hope not. I mean...some these people with "top notch" MBAs, supposedly the shining leaders of the economic arm of country...have fucked up our economy big time. Now, I realize that's probably an oversimplification, but I work in a field that's continually had the "become more like a corporation" message sent in our direction, and now I can't help but smirk a little at the idea that maybe the corporate world might have taken a few tips from other fields instead. It's not that I think corporate culture is evil and awful in every case; but I think corporate culture has gotten away with a lot (e.g. unregulated hedge funds, insane executive compensation) that I hope becomes less common now.

[David]

I hope you are right, RA, but it seems unlikely.