Michelle Caruso-Cabrera, Charlie Gasparino Bash Finance Blogs

At about 2:40 into this interview, CNBC's Michelle Caruso-Cabrera and Charlie Gasparino share some knee-slappers (at least in their opinion) that belittle finance blogs. Something about "moronic bloggers" being a redundant phrase and changing the "Zero Hedge" blog title to "Zero Intelligence."

Even though these two seem to think they're the smartest people in the room, you can't help but get a sense that something deeper is at play with their criticism that probably has to do with the mainstream media continually losing share to blogs and other media outlets.

Comments

[bridanp2:]

I'm getting to where I can't stand these people. They try and interview people, but end up having the interviewees bashing each other with no moderated control whatsoever. Anyone catch that High Frequency Trading segment yesterday? Sheesh! Couple of days before that, they went on and on about Brooklyn Decker and her segment coming up. I think it took at least 2 hours before the segment aired, and it was just about a Swimsuit app for the iPhone. Come on! Is that app really going to push Apple's stock price higher or lower? Waste of time....

Jul 25 11:37 AM

[rperrin:]

I'm very much amused at the enormous amount of sputtering, juvenile hatred directed toward something nearly all the sage commenters say is unworthy of serious attention. Ok, I get it. I really, really do. You don't like CNBC and think they're shills for Korporate Amerika or something, constantly cheerleading for the long side. Fine. If you're of this opinion, why bother with it? You have your own favorite "news" sources that confirm your own worldview, so GO THERE. Judging from conversations with friends, the main reason for the hysterics is because so many people never know when to sell, and want to blame somebody else for it. Nearly every one of the people I know who share the anti-CNBC view are the types who have been fully invested during the selloff of the last year. Investing is not for the lazy. If you don't want to do your homework, you have to take your lumps, if somebody else is pulling the trigger for you. What, you didn't realize that your favorite fund is never going to advise you to get out of it? There are lots of sharp, bearish folks on CNBC who recommend raising cash from time to time. Oftentimes they turn out to be right, and sometimes very right. What, you didn't listen to them, and neither did the guys running your fund? You need to find a game you can play, not whining about how things work.

Jul 25 11:58 AM

[Swashbuckler:]

"Nearly every one of the people I know who share the anti-CNBC view are the types who have been fully invested during the selloff of the past year." Either your range of contacts is very narrow, or you have a misconception on this issue. The majority of anti-CNBC posters on this blog have been negative about the markets for at least a year and have been posting accordingly for the past year.


On Jul 25 11:58 AM rperrin wrote:

> I'm very much amused at the enormous amount of sputtering, juvenile
> hatred directed toward something nearly all the sage commenters say
> is unworthy of serious attention. Ok, I get it. I really, really
> do. You don't like CNBC and think they're shills for Korporate Amerika
> or something, constantly cheerleading for the long side. Fine.
> If you're of this opinion, why bother with it? You have your own
> favorite "news" sources that confirm your own worldview, so GO THERE.
> Judging from conversations with friends, the main reason for the
> hysterics is because so many people never know when to sell, and
> want to blame somebody else for it. Nearly every one of the people
> I know who share the anti-CNBC view are the types who have been fully
> invested during the selloff of the last year. Investing is not for
> the lazy. If you don't want to do your homework, you have to take
> your lumps, if somebody else is pulling the trigger for you. What,
> you didn't realize that your favorite fund is never going to advise
> you to get out of it? There are lots of sharp, bearish folks on
> CNBC who recommend raising cash from time to time. Oftentimes they
> turn out to be right, and sometimes very right. What, you didn't
> listen to them, and neither did the guys running your fund? You
> need to find a game you can play, not whining about how things work.

Jul 25 01:05 PM

[Michael Clark:]

The tards who are bidding up the markets are the guys and gals whose job depends upon the markets going up. If the markets keep going down, they lose their jobs -- and a lot of other people lose their jobs too.

When did the 'bottom line' -- remember when everyone talked about the 'bottom line'? -- has become 'this company beat Wall Street estimates'. The job of the Cheerleaders for the market is to lead the cheers for the markets.

Jul 25 01:39 PM

[Carneades:]

As a larger and larger share of the world's information is disseminated via the blogosphere, there are bound to be traditionalists caught in the crossfire - those who don't "get" it. The typical response from the mainstream media has been to sporadically lash out at blogs, usually by using specific - albeit isolated - examples of misinformation supposedly uncovered on these non-regulated sounding boards. The next step is to attack the author, ad hominem style, as a means of discrediting him. Step #2 is unfortunately impossible to do when the author produces his/her content under a pseudonym; a decision made by many for (to name just a few reasons) the sake of their privacy, avoidance of retaliatory action by an employer or other company that the author must do business with through the course of his employment, or just because the author considers disclosing his identity to be irrelevant in the context of content production.

Mr. Gasparino apparently feels empowered enough to attack an entire class of individual - those choosing to blog anonymously - for what he perceives to be personal attacks by second-rate authors. This is quite an unfortunate reaction, as it reflects poorly upon Charlie Gasparino's maturity, not to mention the judgment of CNBC itself, whose management continues to provide Mr. Gasparino a platform from which to launch his ad hominem, broad based attacks.

That being said, we would encourage Mr.Gasparino and others to continue - if not increase the frequency of - their publicized attacks against bloggers. Doing so will increase financial blog's readership, and hasten the inevitable and ongoing shift towards new media. Thank you CNBC.

Jul 25 06:42 PM

[wheelbarrel...:]

LOL you're use of false logic is impressive - I mean what a completely dumbass comment.


On Jul 25 11:58 AM rperrin wrote:

> I'm very much amused at the enormous amount of sputtering, juvenile
> hatred directed toward something nearly all the sage commenters say
> is unworthy of serious attention. Ok, I get it. I really, really
> do. You don't like CNBC and think they're shills for Korporate Amerika
> or something, constantly cheerleading for the long side. Fine. If
> you're of this opinion, why bother with it? You have your own favorite
> "news" sources that confirm your own worldview, so GO THERE. Judging
> from conversations with friends, the main reason for the hysterics
> is because so many people never know when to sell, and want to blame
> somebody else for it. Nearly every one of the people I know who share
> the anti-CNBC view are the types who have been fully invested during
> the selloff of the last year. Investing is not for the lazy. If you
> don't want to do your homework, you have to take your lumps, if somebody
> else is pulling the trigger for you. What, you didn't realize that
> your favorite fund is never going to advise you to get out of it?
> There are lots of sharp, bearish folks on CNBC who recommend raising
> cash from time to time. Oftentimes they turn out to be right, and
> sometimes very right. What, you didn't listen to them, and neither
> did the guys running your fund? You need to find a game you can play,
> not whining about how things work.

Jul 25 07:04 PM

[Sober Realist:]

Is it time for the US to bring out the heavy stock-hype artillary and send Jim Cramer to China?
2.bp.blogspot.com/_H2D...

Jul 25 07:45 PM

[dcb:]

I am sorry I no longer have the links, but one has to look at this in the greater context. Bloomberg is by far the best regular business media portal and I do not pay any attention to any others. You can get good reporting from as mentioned Charlie Rose and Frontline.

Zero Hedge has done an amazing job of bringing out issues that go ignored by regular media, and I vote them for a pulitzer.

Now for the real message: As more attention gets paid to no traditional media and they better expose what is actually going on did anyone think the big wall street banks, etc would not strike back. I wrote all of my friends who I send information to that there would be a backlash by traditional media and sources attempting to state we are conspiracy nuts, or fringe elements. This is exactly to be expected and in fact shows that efforts are working.

In fact Bloomberg reported that the financial industry was getting a major PR firm and planning a media push on what great guys they are. This is all just part of the big game, and should be viewed as nothing more. Based upon the actions of every major player in this drama if you knw what is going on you should first be very suspect about what they have to say (Paulson, geitner, Bernake, Goldman, SEC, etc) that's just what the data says. If you doubt me check out Bartofsky's testimony in front of congress. Folks this is a war, and with the trillions at stake did you really expect the financial industry to roll over. In truth I actually think the american people are at war with our own government and the financial industry, but that is another story.

I urge and ask you to keep sending out fringe stories to your friends so they know what is going on. I send stuff to my firends, and they NY times. I ask them why they aren't reporting on clear things such as easily seen manipulation, front running, and I accuse them of ignoring the biggest rip off of taxpayers in the history of the US. I tell them this is watergate or Iraq WMD and they should be doing some real reporting on the stuff.

If we are going to end up with a better country from this crisis we all must work very hard to keep the spotlight pointed at the mess. They will fight back, it's to be expected. If they didn't mention us it would mean we don't count!!!

Jul 25 08:05 PM

[dcb:]

I also send the NYtimes tyler prop trading data what the market was doing and point out the market moves clearly have something to do with goldman and political events. Why aren't you reporting this stuff!!!

They are starting to get the hint I think, and you should be accusing them of ignoring the data also!!!

Jul 25 08:07 PM

[Moon Kil Woong:]

The difference between blogging and financial TV is that financial blogs are like on the fly books (They offer plots, theories, information, and facts) financial TV is like a cross between a poorly constructed soap opera (filled with the same people arguing about the same things everyday that has nothing to do with what's really going on in the world) and a very bad info-mercial (they sell a lot and brainwash although you are unsure about exactly what they are selling asides from knowing it's something that is adverse for your pocketbook).

Furthermore, bloggers generally have a higher standard of publishing that traditional media. They have something called peer review and must be credible enough to get people to actually go to their site (not just have a bunch of sheepies with only so many news channels to watch on cable).

Some financial blogs such as this one go so far as making writers answerable to commenters (as well as commenters andwerable to commenters) thus insuring a level of intelligence and integrity that is not demanded by financial TV. When have you seen someone rate CNBC on how terrible their calls are a year after they posted them. I suppose that's why they don't even bother tracking them. They know they are bunkus.

No wonder why so many intelligent people are turning to blogs. But don't worry financial news channels and programs, the target market you are trying to reach clearly is not the same as most financial blogs. And you still offer that wonderful delayed ticker tape for all the non-pros to get burned by Goldman and others that raise and widen the spead of everything your viewers want to buy. Keep up the good work CNBC, but don't think that people who read financial blogs will ever abandon them for your comical financial dog and pony show (I heard Jon Stewart is also treading on your comic relief turf). Oooh, the competition is "sooo heating up." Bring out the clown with a new funny hat please...

Jul 25 11:35 PM

[svosavvy:]

GT- good luck with your bets. I have personally found that cnbc is an integral part of the market. Love them or hate them they are a portion of what I like to call "the foot" The foot is the huge mover, it is more wise to observe the foot and respect its authority rather than to fight it and find yourself underneath it. Learn to profit from the foot like a previous poster noted. Don't hate a crocodile because it has teeth. Respect the teeth and profit from it. Otherwise become a zealot and throw yourself under the bus. IMHO If you expend yourself now you will be a mere tree that falls in the woods instead of building your position to make it worthwhile in the future. Much like the Buffett contributing to charity quandry in the snowball book. Paraphrased (while drunk) you can either contribute to charity a few bucks in the near term, which honestly and no offense they will waste. Or you can choose not to contribute and roll that money you would have for years so that you can give them a real wad in the future. This is much the same IMO as expensing yourself in the near term to make a nice statement or rolling your influence to make a difference in the future. The future is education, I went to public school, I learned calculus, but was never taught how to balance my checkbook. I was taught that financial experts have my best interests at heart and that I am too stupid to figure it out on my own. Not having the grades, the money, or the connections to pursue a business profession I am quite happy with my life as a hobbyist (entreprenurial) investor. I have found my best friends are a fifth grade comprehension of addition and subtraction and a critical eye. My life has changed since I swallowed the finacial red pill and chose to go it myself, much to the warnings of financial "advisors" I was never taught that money=freedom. I was taught that the love of money is the root of all evil. Money=power=freedom=not having to do sh*t you hate to to earn money. EDUCATION that lacks a manipulative function, the ultimate intangible asset. One of my favorite drinking games during the previous administration was to watch the evening national news and take a sip whenever the word "fear" was uttered. Cheers, thank you sincerely if you made it all the way through that. Net positive young pee-on here and proud of it, PS you can keep your bmw's and mercede's. I'll gladly keep my 20 year old buick my tennis shoes from the salvation army and my freedom and dignity. Long not being sold to the company store.

Jul 26 12:25 AM

[GeoffreyTra...:]

You're exactly right, SVOSavvy;

I spent 10 years in an institution (from undergrad through to PhD candidature - left it unfinished)... and while I learned an awful lot of interesting stuff, it doesn't help my trading one iota.

It's always been my belief that the prime requisite for being a good trader is a genuine interest in what you're doing (not just the money) PLUS the red pill.

Likewise, self-motivated analysts - without any letters after their name - are among the best stock analysts I've ever met.

If you sipped every time 'fear' was on the news, I am amazed that your liver is still functioning.

Cars don't get my juices flowing either; my car in France is a 1994 Peugeot 106 and I don't even have a car in Australia. (Although I did buy my Asics Gel Kayanos brand-new... in 2002)

Long anarchy and short the entire parasitic structure that rapes our paypackets.

Cheers


GT

On Jul 26 12:25 AM svosavvy wrote:

> GT- good luck with your bets. I have personally found that cnbc
> is an integral part of the market. Love them or hate them they are
> a portion of what I like to call "the foot" The foot is the huge
> mover, it is more wise to observe the foot and respect its authority
> rather than to fight it and find yourself underneath it. Learn to
> profit from the foot like a previous poster noted. Don't hate a
> crocodile because it has teeth. Respect the teeth and profit from
> it. Otherwise become a zealot and throw yourself under the bus.
> IMHO If you expend yourself now you will be a mere tree that falls
> in the woods instead of building your position to make it worthwhile
> in the future. Much like the Buffett contributing to charity quandry
> in the snowball book. Paraphrased (while drunk) you can either contribute
> to charity a few bucks in the near term, which honestly and no offense
> they will waste. Or you can choose not to contribute and roll that
> money you would have for years so that you can give them a real wad
> in the future. This is much the same IMO as expensing yourself in
> the near term to make a nice statement or rolling your influence
> to make a difference in the future. The future is education, I
> went to public school, I learned calculus, but was never taught how
> to balance my checkbook. I was taught that financial experts have
> my best interests at heart and that I am too stupid to figure it
> out on my own. Not having the grades, the money, or the connections
> to pursue a business profession I am quite happy with my life as
> a hobbyist (entreprenurial) investor. I have found my best friends
> are a fifth grade comprehension of addition and subtraction and a
> critical eye. My life has changed since I swallowed the finacial
> red pill and chose to go it myself, much to the warnings of financial
> "advisors" I was never taught that money=freedom. I was taught
> that the love of money is the root of all evil. Money=power=freedom=not
> having to do sh*t you hate to to earn money. EDUCATION that lacks
> a manipulative function, the ultimate intangible asset. One of
> my favorite drinking games during the previous administration was
> to watch the evening national news and take a sip whenever the word
> "fear" was uttered. Cheers, thank you sincerely if you made it all
> the way through that. Net positive young pee-on here and proud of
> it, PS you can keep your bmw's and mercede's. I'll gladly keep
> my 20 year old buick my tennis shoes from the salvation army and
> my freedom and dignity. Long not being sold to the company store.

Jul 26 03:28 AM

[Philman:]

CNBC is owned by General Electric, which is a company complicit with and an associate member of the PPT/Fed conspiracy. PPT is a conspiracy of New York bankers, who work together, and use the Federal Reserve as a slush fund to provide the cash that fuels stock market manipulation by Goldman Sachs & Co. Not everything that the network promotes or says is fraudulent, but everything they say should be taken with a grain of salt.


On Jul 23 07:25 AM richjoy403 wrote:

> I was watching CNBC since it was the previous network. Investments
> are serious business to me. There is a balance between information
> and entertainment, and CNBC often favors entertainment (especially
> before the market opens)...also I have no interest in whether Bartromo
> or Burnett is their #1 babe.
>
> CNBC is after all intended to produce a profit, and not a small one.
> So, complaining about their stupid antics (e.g.; the seals blowing
> horns) isn't going to produce an on-air change unless the bosses
> decide it is reducing profits.
>
> The #1 thing that bothers me all day long (and I do watch all day
> and through Fast Money, as I can't accept Cramer's antics), is that
> they permit/encourage what should be a useful discussion by persons
> with opposing views to degenerate into a useless and wasted opportunity
> wherein those persons talk over each other before a coherent view
> can be expressed.

Jul 26 11:45 AM

[Wisdom vs. ...:]

read a lot of articles on SA over the last month and you will see an organized effort to marginalize ZH (felix salmon? his innocent fans need to buy a clue); not surprised the cleaners are hitting him on TV as well.
SVOsavvy's rant is one of the most concise little chunks of wisdom i have read lately. the only thing i would debate is whether financial TV gets you on the train in time; if wall st decides to push a sector, you might as well ride, and if they kill it you might as well get off-- if you are trading. long term, who cares? how many people MUST sell their entire portfolio today? the next year? when wall st/TV tells you to get off the train, there is no point buying any time soon. can you calmly sell that stock you love b/c wall st suddenly hates the sector? tough.
do you understand why cramer is beloved? it is not because of his stock picks. i watch cramer regularly at the gym. i am rarely interested in his picks, but i have noticed that the sectors he gets into are the ones that pop. you cannot blame or give cramer credit for the entire sector. he seems to know which sector is about to become the latest analyst darling and passes it on gently in the form of individual stocks; i believe that the record shows his individual picks are nothing special. cramer is beloved because of the one thing he definitely does right, reach out to newbs: 1. he teaches fundamental stock analysis & portfolio building just like i learned 20 years ago and 2. most importantly to newbs, cramer calls all those risky little sexy foreign and domestic companies that callers think are gold mines dogshite. i respect him as an educator and understand his appeal; if he can make a few newbs independent of professional traders then he has done us all a favor.

Jul 26 01:27 PM

[bcncv:]

There are some smart bloggers out there, and some horrible bloggers. Just like CNBC, the ability to draw an audience is defined by showmanship and by telling people what they want to hear as opposed to true insight.

Regardless of the format, the quality opinions will be mixed in with hundreds (thousands?) of people that can present their ideas in a prettier wrapper.

Jul 26 02:34 PM

[ejhickey:]

I secon your comments


On Jul 23 07:25 AM richjoy403 wrote:

> I was watching CNBC since it was the previous network. Investments
> are serious business to me. There is a balance between information
> and entertainment, and CNBC often favors entertainment (especially
> before the market opens)...also I have no interest in whether Bartromo
> or Burnett is their #1 babe.
>
> CNBC is after all intended to produce a profit, and not a small one.
> So, complaining about their stupid antics (e.g.; the seals blowing
> horns) isn't going to produce an on-air change unless the bosses
> decide it is reducing profits.
>
> The #1 thing that bothers me all day long (and I do watch all day
> and through Fast Money, as I can't accept Cramer's antics), is that
> they permit/encourage what should be a useful discussion by persons
> with opposing views to degenerate into a useless and wasted opportunity
> wherein those persons talk over each other before a coherent view
> can be expressed.

Jul 26 04:05 PM

[ejhickey:]

I have to start reading Zero hedge if CNBC is trashing them.

Jul 26 04:13 PM

[Michael Clark:]

Yes.


On Jul 25 07:45 PM Sober Realist wrote:

> Is it time for the US to bring out the heavy stock-hype artillary
> and send Jim Cramer to China?
> 2.bp.blogspot.com/_H2D...

Jul 27 03:21 AM

[svosavvy:]

I am not into anarchy in the implied face value sense. But, I wouldn't mind seeing an orderly unwinding of how we presently do business. Possibly I am too young and just don't realize that serfdom and fealty are key facets of human sociology. I am not a religious person, but, I like to see people generally happy and not sad. What I see are a lot of sad people who do jobs they hate to finance the crap they don't need. And it's getting worse now they have to stay at the job they hate or they'll never afford health insurance, and they we pump'em full of fear, what happens if I get sick and can't work, enter that stupid duck. I am not saying everyone should quit their jobs, I think work is an integral part of the human experience. I just think there are a lot of round pegs shoved in square holes and it is a poor allotment of human capital. They are shoved there by the invisible hand of money problems that they were never taught the power of and now have to endure first hand. Yes, I apologize I am way off topic here, sorry about that. It used to be when you were an indentured servant you only had put in 7 years worth of time. Now with adjustible rate balloon financing someone can actually own your ass for the rest of your life. Now I may be arguing semantics here, but, that is my theme. Now, yes it's true you have to sign on the dotted line to get this crap that is somehow supposed to enhance your life, nobody forced you to take on this debt or did they. Bombardment of consuming ideals seems to me the siren song lulling the would be toward the rocks. Ps I love this country and my family has a proud history of fighting for it, I just like it when the metronome is straight up and down instead of at one extreme pole or another, bolsheviks aren't the answer neither is naked capitalism, more likely a love child between the two.

Jul 27 11:21 AM

[User 456455:]

with all respect, i have yet to find a blog that does not have some angle it is trying to pursue or bullish/bearish bias it is trying to promulgate. take any news or website or tv show for what it is -- an attempt to get the author some sort of notoriety and/or financial advantage. there is no monopoly on wisdom and all outlets can -- can -- be useful for market tells, contrarian signals, offsets to your own view, challenges to your view, etc. use them for what they're worth but never express their views in your portfolio untested.

Jul 28 12:14 AM