This was quite the busy week, at least in terms of interesting stories and links. Here is my own (biased) list of favorites:

In Barron’s, Alan Abelson explains why GDP data ain’t all that.  (If no Barron’s subcription, than click here).

It turns out that the Dow Theory Still Works. (Who knew?)

I mix it up again with the prediction market folk here in Prediction Markets Redux; Recall last year, my column on Political Futures Markets caused a bit of a stir amongst the futures cognesceti.

Slate’s Dan Gross looks into vice investing versus socially responsible funds in (the amusingly titled):  God vs. Satan: Who’s the better investor?

This week’s Apprenticed Investor takes a look at how our emotions wreak havoc on investing returns.  Curb Your Enthusiasm. Turns out the solution to this is just a little brain damage.

Don’t overlook the (surprisingly) good two part series in the Washington Times on China:

1) Thefts of U.S. technology boost China’s weaponry
2) Chinese dragon awakens   

This week’s music and film discussion covers a lot of ground:

Content Consolidation & the Long Tail looks into how consolidated media of all sorts (radio, movies, and even journalism) lowers the variety and quality. Problem for these companies are that there are free and easily accessible replacement available on line.   

A recent UK Study found that Downloaders Buy More Music; This led an music industry insider suggest that labels should Give It Away.

And for those hardcores who are interested, Why Payola Matters.

I mentioned (via the NYT) the shameful behavior by Altera management not allowing analysts with a sell rating on the stock to ask questions in their conference call; Well, now that Altera apologized to the analyst it snubbed, we can all thank Gretchen Morgenson of the NYT.   

One of my favorite stock blogs is Jeff Matthews Is Not Making This Up; Its got just the right mix of snark and info.

And just for laughs, Hacking Halo so Warriors do Ballet

Category: Media

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

Comments are closed.