Over the past 5 years, I have appeared on various Financial TV shows over a 100 times. But I am also a huge consumer of financial news, in print, on the web, radio, and of course, TV. Being on both sides of the camera gives me a fairly good perspective on what does and doesn’t work on TV. I also have some strong ideas as to what is good and bad TV in terms of providing a social utility, being part of the democratic process, etc.
Indeed, this is a longstanding interest of mine. Over the weekend, I referenced the current Columbia Journalism Review (CJR) issue that focused on the role of the media in the credit crisis, stock market and economic collapse (CJR on CNBC, WSJ & Business Press). This area has long interested me (hence, our media panel at TBP conference). But I was surprised this post generated 100 comments from readers.
One emailer challenged me on CJR’s CNBC piece: “Its easy to complain, but what would you do to “fix” Financial Television?”
Challenge accepted. Here are my general suggestions as to how to “fix” what needs repair on not just CNBC, but all FinTV.
How to Fix Financial Television
1. Stop Yelling. Stop interrupting. Stop Talking Over Each Other: This is not Jerry Springer, its serious business. People’s investments and retirement are at stake. Please treat it that way.
2. Bring us People We Don’t Have Access to. What various FinTV channels do really well is bring us long, thoughtful interviews with the likes of Warren Buffett, WIlliam Ackman, David Einhorn, and others. People we wouldn’t ordinarily have access to. Example: This morning, CNBC had on James Rickard. More of this please.
3. S – L – O – W D – O – W – N
4. Risk: All traders must appreciate the potential downside of trades. So too, must FinTV. Explain stop losses. Understand Risk/Reward. Recognize there are periods when Buy & Hold is a jumbo loser.
5. Lose the Octobox. Fire whoever came up with the Decabox. ‘Nuff said.
6. Separate the Signal from the Noise. Understand that most of the day-to-day action is simply noise. If you look at a long term chart, you will barely be able to see 1987 or 9/11. If those major events get lost in the long term trend, what does the intraday jags, kinks and reversals mean? Very little. Recognize that not every data release, slice of news, or rumor is at all significant. Stop treating them as if they were.
7. Fact Check: An awful lot of things on air get stated with authority and confidence. Much of what is stated is little more than junk or pop myths. Why is it that the more dubious a proposition is, the greater the confidence the speaker seems to muster? Right or wrong, never in doubt. Consider fact checking as much of the statements that are made on air as possible, and making frequent corrections.
8. Accountability is important: I am astounded at some of the money losing hacks that are various shows again and again. These are the “articulate incompetants” to use Bennett Goodspeed’s phrase. Why not keep track of the records of guests — and let the viewers know how their past few calls have been. Are they Perma-bulls or bears? Are their stock picks good , bad or awful? Are they reliable money makers? If not, let us know. (Of course, the better question is: If they are not moneymakers, why even have them on?)
9. Bring Back Louis Rukeyser: Not the man, but rather, his style. Wall $treet Week — Rukeyser hosted it from 1970 to 2005 — was plain-spoken, thoughtful and accessible. Quiet, contemplative, discussions, with intelligent market participants, revealing helpful information. The investing public would appreciate something of that sort — again.
10. Sound FX: What is with all the bizarre sound effects every time a screen changes? Its financial news, not a video game. Kill ‘em.
11. Embed your video (on your own website or YouTube) instead of using WMP. At long last, thank you.
12. Investigative Pieces: David Faber seems to have a monopoly on deep, long thoughtful analyses. Be they on Wal-Mart, the credit crisis, whatever, his long format work is a highlight of CNBC. More of these, please.
13. Most stock picks are losers. That’s normal, but the audience does not realize this. A big part of the challenge is informing the viewer that finding big winners is a low probability, high outcome, event. As in a baseball, a 350 hitter is a star. Explain this to your audience.
14. Stop the Bull/Bear Debate: This is a vast over-simplification of the market, and often does not serve the audience well. There are nuances and variables that get lost when you reduce everything to black and white.
15. Partisanship: Leave your personal politics at home. Viewers don’t care what most of you think.
16. Respect the Audience: We are adults. Treat us that way.
Murdoch’s WSJ Changes Creates Opening for NYT, FT (April 24, 2008)
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.