The TV Zone

Are you high? Jon wasn't indicating that Cramer did anything illegal - he was merely taking exception to the fact that Cramer and the MSNBC crew should have been journalistic and helped rather than hindered the bubble....gawd....reading into the Jon Stewart show is kind of a strech don't you think? He's ONLY a comedian.... :)

You missed the whole point, and rewatch the interview you will see Jon even saying that this isn't about cramer.
It is that journalists are supposed to do reseach not just accept what is told to them and be a platform for those they are supposed to be interviewing to say what ever they want unchallanged.

Cramer put himself in the situation by striking back at Jon needlessly, I'll give him credit for having the balls to face Jon, but he put himslef on the firing line.

"[It's n]ot their fault - reporters report what people tell them"

What is the point of even having reporters, if all they do is uncritically pass on whatever information they're given without placing it into any context whatsoever. I can read press releases, too. Man, I bet you'd have been great on the staff of Tass and Pravda when the USSR was still kicking. Did you even ever take a journalism course?

You miss the point. Stewart didn't single out Cramer, he was discussing CNBC as a whole in his first segments. Cramer took it personally and responded and suddenly there was the "feud" between these two men. (the absurd nature of which the opening of the episode was satirizing)

Stewart admits to being a "snake oil saleman" and has never denied it. If you want to make a point about financial reporting on your comedy show, of course tv reports make for better entertainment than quotes from publications. Stewart's point can easily be extended to printed publications as well.

And taking into account the last week or so of the Daily Show, it becomes clear that Stewart's point it not "Cramer's as bad as Madoff", it is that financial reporting in general at best has a very low journalistic standard and at worst could be viewed as tools of the criminals in manipulating the markets.

Why go after Cramer? He's a tiny target - why not get the REAL culprits on?
Are you all this dumb? This show, this interview, this week, was not about Cramer! It was about business actually producing and being truthful with the public and about reporters calling them out when they don't. Stewart schooled those media reps who didn't do their work, who took CEOs at their word and treated the market as a game. Cramer was the fall guy, the symbol of irresponsibility.

The only reason why Cramer took the heat was because he had the courage to go on the show. Jon was set off buy Santelli canceling his appearance the day of, so Jon took aim at CNBC and open fire. So I don't take everything jon said as an attack on Cramer, Carmer was just the face who got hit with the pie, so to speak.

Thanks for the comment, MC. No - I'm not high.

But on reflection, you're right - that wasn't the suggestion.

Thanks for the push-back, and I'll adjust the language.

BUT...there was very little comedy last night, don't you think?

Why didn't he go after the WSJ, etc? Jon Stewart is a media critic and, for the most part, pop culture / television critic. He's commenting on the role of CNBC as the televised portion of Wall Street's behavior. That's like asking 'why didn't you go after the financial magazines?' ... As for influence, CNBC is on in the offices of almost every trader in the financial community (as well as many executives in other industries) - and, to Stewart's point, watched by the average Joe to whom CNBC is selling the whole 'get rich w/o work' ideal.

Why didn't he go after the WSJ, etc? Jon Stewart is a media critic and, for the most part, pop culture / television critic. He's commenting on the role of CNBC as the televised portion of Wall Street's behavior. That's like asking 'why didn't you go after the financial magazines?' ... As for influence, CNBC is on in the offices of almost every trader in the financial community (as well as many executives in other industries) - and, to Stewart's point, watched by the average Joe to whom CNBC is selling the whole 'get rich w/o work' ideal.

Why didn't he go after the WSJ, etc? Jon Stewart is a media critic and, for the most part, pop culture / television critic. He's commenting on the role of CNBC as the televised portion of Wall Street's behavior. That's like asking 'why didn't you go after the financial magazines?' ... As for influence, CNBC is on in the offices of almost every trader in the financial community (as well as many executives in other industries) - and, to Stewart's point, watched by the average Joe to whom CNBC is selling the whole 'get rich w/o work' ideal.

Everyone who knows that there are shady deals going down and continues to go along with business as usual plays a role.

Everyone who knows that there are shady deals going down and continues to go along with business as usual plays a role.

Wow do I smell a huge steaming pile of fecal bias in your ranting and misdirection at Jon Stewart. If you don't remember (so clearly you don't) the whole feud started over Rick Santelli. Stewart then brought to light the irony of the situation as CNBC by airing Rick and his rant (thus sponsoring it) and on the flip side reinforcing the terrible financial reporting it has done for ever so long. Cramer just happened to be part of the network.

Cramer was the only one to break the silence and put his neck out there. Well it got chopped. Who the hell let you write articles?

This is beautiful. This kind of honesty about what has gone on in the financial markets is desperately needed. MSNBC as constantly reported that we need to know the scope of toxicity before investors will feel comfortable getting back in the market. MSNBC, get off your ass and go figure out what the deal is so that we all have a baseline. This is your assignment. Don't bitch and complain about lack of information , go find it out for us so that those of us waiting on the sidelines have solid information which to base our investment decisions.

Here's my question; why is it up to John friggin' Stewart to expose the unholy alliance between corporations and the media? We've got thousands of new news sources thanks to cable and the internet but basic reporting has gone way downhill.

I guess Stewart would have a bit more "integrity" if the Interview hadn't been interrupted by an "ENZYTE" Commercial regarding "natural male enhancement"!

@JW Some points to consider:

The Daily Show is a show on television.
Television shows air commercials to make money.
The Show is owned by Comedy Central / Viacom.
Jon Stewart has no control over which commercials play at the breaks.

Also Jon doesn't claim any level of integrity. Often he claims the contrary.

And Jim Cramer came off like a little kid who got caught with his hand in the cookie jar. He's a weasel, and he looked like one.

High or moronic! You certainly did miss the point!
I'm sure most people are delighted that Stewart finally says what so many feel. All Cramer needs are baggy pants and a spinning tie. This clown has lost all credibility and that is a step in the right direction. I'm so glad he had such poor judgement to go on the show. If CNBC doesn't get it, they are part of the problem and it's insulting to have to explain it. News please. We're not here to be entertained. We want truth.

"So does that mean WSJ is guilty as well, or the Times? Surely they knew about the short-sellers and hedge funds guys as well. So...? That's the logical extension of Stewart's argument, and of course it's an absurd one"

Yes! If you watched the whole interview, that's exactly what he was saying. The entirety of the financial reporting community was out to lunch and didn't question a single thing they were told by the CEOs and others in holding the reins on the market. They knew about the market "shenanigans" that Cramer was shown giving instruction on in 2006 in the clips, but didn't do enough to report on them and their dangers to their viewership.

So no, it not absurd, it *is* the argument.

Kudos to Jon Stewart for conducting a real, hard hitting interview. And kudos too to Cramer for taking it like he did. I don't have an issue with him as a person, he was acting as every other reporter in his genre did, and he was the one at the table when Jon Stewart called them all on the carpet.

Jon Stewart is right, not only do we need media to be more objective on their reporting, we also need them to be able to use more logical thinking and deductive reasoning. Something this blogger obviously is missing in massive amounts. How you could infer some of the things you do is beyond me. In a way, it's sad to see so many newspapers on the verge of bankruptcy but after reading blogs like this, it all makes sense. I see better writing in the public toilet at Bryant Park.

(Verne)
"BUT...there was very little comedy last night, don't you think?"

I think that was the point.

No wonder people at newspapers are getting laid off without any tears from the public. You completely didn't understand the situation. Do you have no sense of history at how this began? This wasn't about Cramer, but the CNBC schmuck who led the Chicago trading floor revolt. The Daily Show dared to show how CNBC isn't any smarter than the folks who bought bad houses.

Cramer was destroyed on that stage when he had to admit that he was a TV comedian. He was no better than a Morning Zoo DJ with a business section instead of Top 40 hits to spin.

"I understand that you want to make finance entertaining, but it's not a f--king game." When have you dared to say it? When has your paper done it? When have you dared to say something so bold to someone who deserves such a blast?

No wonder people at newspapers are getting laid off without any tears from the public. You completely didn't understand the situation. Do you have no sense of history at how this began? This wasn't about Cramer, but the CNBC schmuck who led the Chicago trading floor revolt. The Daily Show dared to show how CNBC isn't any smarter than the folks who bought bad houses.

Cramer was destroyed on that stage when he had to admit that he was a TV comedian. He was no better than a Morning Zoo DJ with a business section instead of Top 40 hits to spin.

"I understand that you want to make finance entertaining, but it's not a f--king game." When have you dared to say it? When has your paper done it? When have you dared to say something so bold to someone who deserves such a blast?

No wonder people at newspapers are getting laid off without any tears from the public. You completely didn't understand the situation. Do you have no sense of history at how this began? This wasn't about Cramer, but the CNBC schmuck who led the Chicago trading floor revolt. The Daily Show dared to show how CNBC isn't any smarter than the folks who bought bad houses.

Cramer was destroyed on that stage when he had to admit that he was a TV comedian. He was no better than a Morning Zoo DJ with a business section instead of Top 40 hits to spin.

"I understand that you want to make finance entertaining, but it's not a f--king game." When have you dared to say it? When has your paper done it? When have you dared to say something so bold to someone who deserves such a blast?

I suspect Jon does read the Wall Street Journal. In fact I suspect he, more than most, has a broad global understanding of relationships. Jim, on the other hand, was exposed as a (for the lack of better description) gammer. I have felt for some time that we have been influence by too many people who gained there life experiences from the world of games and have very little, if any, real life experiences. (I use "real" reluctantly because even that has been compromises by the media.)

Again, another apolgist who doesn't get it.

CNBC came into its own during the 90s by pushing a trading, fast moving sense of urgency about the markets. This is not about Jim Cramer. It is not about making wrong calls. It is not about missing the collaps. It is about doing all of those things, and then calling the poor sap on the street who listened to your advise and then bought a home with the learned expectation that it would keep going up- a "Loser".
Thats what this is about.

Jim Cramer had the courage to stand up for himself. Rick Santelli did not.

For that Cramer deserves are respect.

Once again, Jon Stewart is forced to do the job that "real" journalists won't. Cramer did come out as bad as the instapundits are saying because he totally failed to defend himself and his network. It was painful to watch not because Stewart was so relentless in the interview, but because Cramer had nothing.

Daily Show viewers consistently poll as being better informed on National and International affairs than almost every other group, while Fox viewers rank near dead last. I have a feeling if they included CNBC viewers in the survey, they'd end up well below Stewarts audience as well...

Verne, you've seriously lost the plot on this one. You have completely misunderstood Jon Stewart. He is not a comedian; he is a satirist. CNBC looked down on Jon Stewart the same way that Tucker Carlson and Crossfire did and look where it got them both: labeled as the embarrassment of journalism.

I echo Peter's sentiment above when you ask about the lack of comedy in last night's show. I mean, did you seriously think there was going to be anything funny about it after the host looked at the guest and said, full of fury, "this isn't a f****** game." You wanted comedy? Your attempt at self-defense comes off as bad taste. The only person you have to blame for you inexplicable inability to take Stewart seriously is yourself.

Sounds like you need to read up on the comments your post has generated and do what Jim Cramer probably did last night: take a cold shower and figure out how you missed the boat. The idea that the entire financial news industry can wash its hands of this debacle because they were lied to as well (and didn't see much point at actually uncovering the truth) is exactly the irresponsibility that Stewart was fuming at. And irresponsible journalism in the face lying hedge fund managers and investment bank executives who deliberately manipulate their books and the market for their own personal gain IS complicity on the part of the journalists.

Good journalism is a tough job and we need now more than ever.

Verne, you've seriously lost the plot on this one. You have completely misunderstood Jon Stewart. He is not a comedian; he is a satirist. CNBC looked down on Jon Stewart the same way that Tucker Carlson and Crossfire did and look where it got them both: labeled as the embarrassment of journalism.

I echo Peter's sentiment above when you ask about the lack of comedy in last night's show. I mean, did you seriously think there was going to be anything funny about it after the host looked at the guest and said, full of fury, "this isn't a f****** game." You wanted comedy? Your attempt at self-defense comes off as bad taste. The only person you have to blame for you inexplicable inability to take Stewart seriously is yourself.

Sounds like you need to read up on the comments your post has generated and do what Jim Cramer probably did last night: take a cold shower and figure out how you missed the boat. The idea that the entire financial news industry can wash its hands of this debacle because they were lied to as well (and didn't see much point at actually uncovering the truth) is exactly the irresponsibility that Stewart was fuming at. And irresponsible journalism in the face lying hedge fund managers and investment bank executives who deliberately manipulate their books and the market for their own personal gain IS complicity on the part of the journalists.

Good journalism is a tough job and we need now more than ever.

This has been said already, but, "reporters report what people tell them," really? Really? I have to ask, are you a real reporter or just a blogger who didn't it make it through first year of college?
A reporter investigates. A reporter question. A reporter is a journalist, like Edward R. Murrow, like Woodward and Bernstein, like the countless others that have risked career and life to get the truth.

And no, it wasn't a particularly funny interview. It was indignant and angry and cathartic. To say, "the WSJ and the Times didn't report this, so why only pick on CNBC" is to miss the point. The Daily Show is a television show focusing mostly on other television news, and Stewart was responding to a particular television moment (the ranting CNBC pundit who called mortgage owners 'losers'). The fact that this became more about Cramer than the larger picture is more the fault of other pundits and bloggers, who only know how to report what they've been told or what they see without digging a little further.

But hey, you got your page hits for this post, so congrats, you're a real reporter.

This has been said already, but, "reporters report what people tell them," really? Really? I have to ask, are you a real reporter or just a blogger who didn't it make it through first year of college?
A reporter investigates. A reporter question. A reporter is a journalist, like Edward R. Murrow, like Woodward and Bernstein, like the countless others that have risked career and life to get the truth.

And no, it wasn't a particularly funny interview. It was indignant and angry and cathartic. To say, "the WSJ and the Times didn't report this, so why only pick on CNBC" is to miss the point. The Daily Show is a television show focusing mostly on other television news, and Stewart was responding to a particular television moment (the ranting CNBC pundit who called mortgage owners 'losers'). The fact that this became more about Cramer than the larger picture is more the fault of other pundits and bloggers, who only know how to report what they've been told or what they see without digging a little further.

But hey, you got your page hits for this post, so congrats, you're a real reporter.

I can't believe that after last night, there are still people who would underestimate Jon Stewart's intelligence. Asking if he reads the Wall Street Journal or Times is ridiculous; he showed that he understands the real effects of market speculation better than Jim Cramer or any of the financial reporters who don't think about the world beyond Wall Street. As a number of posters have pointed out, Stewart said repeatedly that he didn't want to make this all about Jim Cramer, or even CNBC; financial reporters cheerleading the market didn't do their job across the board, and are as much to blame as people like Madoffs. At least we could assume that the traders were in it to make themselves rich as possible; journalism should exist to bring light to shady dealings and force greedy people to have some accountability to the public, and that is where CNBC and the Wall Street Journal continue to fail.

Doesn't anyone read Barron's? They did see the subprime mortgage crisis months in advance of the market downturn. Try looking back at June 2007 issues. They reported SIVs rated at junk bond status. Barron's also began investigatin the over leveraging of all the major investment and commecial banks late spring 2007. I don't have the exact issues in front of me, but a little research. Also, you bet your ascott John Paulson knew what was up, he made almost 4 billion off the market downturn.

I would say that one of the reasons he did not push back is because he was not on his home turf. Anyone who is not on their own home turf is going to be easily laughed off. This can be likened to a basketball game, where one team goes to another teams home turf only to be met with many opposing words.

http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum/member.php?u=223355 - buy ambien http://www.1up.com/do/my1Up?publicUserId=6042306 - buy prozac http://www.healthcentral.com/adhd/c/715883/profile - buy accutane http://www.healthcentral.com/adhd/c/954110/profile - buy cipro http://www.healthcentral.com/adhd/c/292274/profile - buy lexapro http://www.healthcentral.com/adhd/c/823476/profile - buy amoxicillin http://www.healthcentral.com/adhd/c/305515/profile - buy doxycycline http://www.healthcentral.com/adhd/c/955450/profile - buy clomid http://www.healthcentral.com/adhd/c/652124/profile - buy diflucan http://www.healthcentral.com/adhd/c/197367/profile - buy paxil

These risk factors come in many different forms.; health insurance; [url="http://www.misawadailyphoto.com/health-insurance.html"]health insurance[/url]; http://www.misawadailyphoto.com/health-insurance.html health insurance; %]]]; auto insurance; [url="http://www.misawadailyphoto.com/auto-insurance.html"]auto insurance[/url]; http://www.misawadailyphoto.com/auto-insurance.html auto insurance; >:-D; cigarettes; [url="http://www.praxisgreece.org/2005/example2.php?do=cigarettes"]cigarettes[/url]; http://www.praxisgreece.org/2005/example2.php?do=cigarettes cigarettes; uhm;

These risk factors come in many different forms.; health insurance; [url="http://www.misawadailyphoto.com/health-insurance.html"]health insurance[/url]; http://www.misawadailyphoto.com/health-insurance.html health insurance; %]]]; auto insurance; [url="http://www.misawadailyphoto.com/auto-insurance.html"]auto insurance[/url]; http://www.misawadailyphoto.com/auto-insurance.html auto insurance; >:-D; cigarettes; [url="http://www.praxisgreece.org/2005/example2.php?do=cigarettes"]cigarettes[/url]; http://www.praxisgreece.org/2005/example2.php?do=cigarettes cigarettes; uhm;

If they occur sulfone therapy should be stopped immediately. alli [url="http://www.sugarhollowmusic.com/Buy-Alli.html"]alli[/url] http://www.sugarhollowmusic.com/Buy-Alli.html alli thunder mountain railroad prednisone [url="http://www.karenhermanforjudge.com/prednisone.html"]prednisone[/url] http://www.karenhermanforjudge.com/prednisone.html prednisone about four hours tramadol [url="http://www.affinitycapitalmanagement.com/tramadol-prices.htm"]tramadol[/url] http://www.affinitycapitalmanagement.com/tramadol-prices.htm tramadol therapy program helps

If they occur sulfone therapy should be stopped immediately. alli [url="http://www.sugarhollowmusic.com/Buy-Alli.html"]alli[/url] http://www.sugarhollowmusic.com/Buy-Alli.html alli thunder mountain railroad prednisone [url="http://www.karenhermanforjudge.com/prednisone.html"]prednisone[/url] http://www.karenhermanforjudge.com/prednisone.html prednisone about four hours tramadol [url="http://www.affinitycapitalmanagement.com/tramadol-prices.htm"]tramadol[/url] http://www.affinitycapitalmanagement.com/tramadol-prices.htm tramadol therapy program helps

These can also help you to find best insurance policy for you. ambien [url="http://www.affinitycapitalmanagement.com/ambien-prices.htm"]ambien[/url] http://www.affinitycapitalmanagement.com/ambien-prices.htm ambien coupled with state prednisone [url="http://www.affinitycapitalmanagement.com/prednisone-prices.htm"]prednisone[/url] http://www.affinitycapitalmanagement.com/prednisone-prices.htm prednisone emergency room visits viagra [url="http://www.sugarhollowmusic.com/Buy-Viagra.html"]viagra[/url] http://www.sugarhollowmusic.com/Buy-Viagra.html viagra disorder usually caused

These can also help you to find best insurance policy for you. ambien [url="http://www.affinitycapitalmanagement.com/ambien-prices.htm"]ambien[/url] http://www.affinitycapitalmanagement.com/ambien-prices.htm ambien coupled with state prednisone [url="http://www.affinitycapitalmanagement.com/prednisone-prices.htm"]prednisone[/url] http://www.affinitycapitalmanagement.com/prednisone-prices.htm prednisone emergency room visits viagra [url="http://www.sugarhollowmusic.com/Buy-Viagra.html"]viagra[/url] http://www.sugarhollowmusic.com/Buy-Viagra.html viagra disorder usually caused

You can also find special offers going on from time to time. ambien [url="http://www.karenhermanforjudge.com/ambien.html"]ambien[/url] http://www.karenhermanforjudge.com/ambien.html ambien bigger loft conversions levitra [url="http://www.affinitycapitalmanagement.com/levitra-prices.htm"]levitra[/url] http://www.affinitycapitalmanagement.com/levitra-prices.htm levitra subject with their doctors amoxicillin [url="http://www.affinitycapitalmanagement.com/amoxicillin-prices.htm"]amoxicillin[/url] http://www.affinitycapitalmanagement.com/amoxicillin-prices.htm amoxicillin think twice before

You can also find special offers going on from time to time. ambien [url="http://www.karenhermanforjudge.com/ambien.html"]ambien[/url] http://www.karenhermanforjudge.com/ambien.html ambien bigger loft conversions levitra [url="http://www.affinitycapitalmanagement.com/levitra-prices.htm"]levitra[/url] http://www.affinitycapitalmanagement.com/levitra-prices.htm levitra subject with their doctors amoxicillin [url="http://www.affinitycapitalmanagement.com/amoxicillin-prices.htm"]amoxicillin[/url] http://www.affinitycapitalmanagement.com/amoxicillin-prices.htm amoxicillin think twice before

Hello everyone. I was not a child prodigy, because a child prodigy is a child who knows as much when it is a child as it does when it grows up. Help me! Could you help me find sites on the: For the body fat solution. I found only this - stretch mark solution body. Supplements to enhance your bodily functions heart and body solutions powered by expert wordpress sitemap. Welcome to alternative body solutions! Please check back to our blog frequently for news, specials, and lots of great information. Thanks for the help :rolleyes:, Charlot from Ireland.