Seeking Alpha
Full index of posts »
Posts by Ticker
Latest Comments
-
Mayascribe on New publishing models that work, for different reasons Mick: Media is indeed rapidly evolving. SA's co...
-
SA Editor Jonathan Liss on Oil price manipulation Will be interesting to see if they can get arou...
-
one eye on SA Editor's Corner: Claims of corporate fraud on Seeking Alpha One other thing Mick: How do you know whether I...
-
one eye on SA Editor's Corner: Claims of corporate fraud on Seeking Alpha OG: The full extent of the Email correspondence...
-
optionsgirl on SA Editor's Corner: Claims of corporate fraud on Seeking Alpha Dear Mick: If you really want to understand wha...
Posts by Themes
Instablogs are Seeking Alpha's free blogging platform customized for finance, with instant set up and exposure to millions of readers interested in the financial markets. Publish your own instablog in minutes.


















Oil price manipulation
InterContinentalExchange (ICE), a focus of Phil's critique, contacted us to dispute the article. As always, we want to correct any factual errors that may exist in the article, but we haven't heard any such claims yet from ICE. ICE preferred not to work through our standard process for disputing an article (we handle 5-10 such disputes per week). Instead, ICE and Phil are going to have a call today and see if they can work out their differences of fact, if not differences of opinion. If they can't, I hope to have either an official dispute from ICE, or an article from ICE that counters Phil's - or both.
Update: See the Editor's note at the end of Phil's article.
Zack Miller: 'Many investors don't belong in the market'
Zack also had some kind words about what we've accomplished at SA:
Why independent bloggers matter
Glenn Greenwald at Salon has two disturbing posts on how GE's (GE) control over NBC and MSNBC, and News Corp.'s (NWS) control over Fox have driven editorial decisions at these outlets - see GE's silencing of Olbermann and MSNBC's sleazy use of Richard Wolffe and The scope -- and dangers -- of GE's control of NBC and MSNBC. (And don't miss the Charlie Rose hypocrisy item in the first post.)
Meanwhile, Eric Etheridge at NYT has a helpful wrapup of the latest blogs-are-killing-newspapers kerfuffle: a discussion around Gawker blogger Hamilton Nolan's re-use of Washington Post reporter Ian Shapira's juicy quotes from a recent WashPo column. The upshot as I see it: Nolan was able to speak in a real, direct, candid voice about the very items that Shapira produced but was unable to present in the manner that he himself wanted to due to the institutional restrictions of traditional journalism. But Matthew Ingram is certainly right that Nolan should have more clearly cited Shapira in his Gawker post. There is a problem of fair and balanced citation and linking of authors in the blogosphere.
Now of course, Greenwald's GE/NWS item has to do with corporate control over the political debate, while the Nolan/Shapira item addresses the stubborn lack of point-of-view in traditional journalism. But there's common ground: It's not just the economics of online content that threaten lively, direct and constructive debate. The conventions and ownership structures of large, traditional media outlets remain problematic to that end as well. While Shapira laments a lack of equity in Gawkers' use and (top-heavy!) profit from his work, the question of why Gawker blogs are so popular remains - and a good deal of that is due to the independent and opinionated point of view. As Gabriel Snyder says in a follow-up at Gawker: "blogs say the things that hidebound newspaper editors are too afraid to let their reporters write."
This is why we carry truly independent market bloggers at Seeking Alpha - and push the best of their writing to our homepage and Editors' Picks. You'll find unique, well-researched insight and critique of publicly traded companies here, because we have hundreds of independent contributors who thankfully lack any corporate or conventional media shackles and can simply call it as they see it.
We can therefore count of more of what John Reeder observes: