Persona Non Grata at CNBC
I had lunch the other day with several other analysts, strategists, money managers and economists, all of whom shall remain nameless.
All make frequent media appearances.
The conversation drifted over to CNBC. The consensus is everyone at the table wants to do less of it.
The reasons given:
-Producers try to tailor the discussion (“Be more Bullish/Bearish”);
-Too time consuming;
-Law of diminishing returns — the benefits are less and less each appearance;
-Nuance has become a dirty word (“Pick a Letter to describe the economy”);
-Last minute cancellations when “better” names become available;
-Dumbing down of the discourse (One person called it “Foxification”)
I then mention that while I still do a ton of media, I have become Persona Non Grata at CNBC.
There was an issue with some really obnoxious blog comments (they were deleted); I started asking not to be booked with really dumb guests (I also requested no Octobox). I did do Fox a few times (But really, who cares about that? I do all media outlets on behalf of my firm).
With Dylan gone, I dont hear from Fast Money, and with Kudlow, I was told I was “too nuanced“– a phrase that is hardly ever used to describe me. I hadn’t done Squawk Box in years, and I know Joe Kernan ain’t no fan of blogs.
Such is life in the big city . . .
Tweet
Facebook
Reddit
Digg this!
February 24th, 2010 at 8:30 pm
It’s not just you. I notice many of the “nuanced voices” that used to be on CNBC are missing these days.
Also, just so you know.. I was home at lunch…turned on MSNBC and there was Matt Taibbi trying to talk about his new article and even trying to focus on the Wall St. Bonuses (old news) but he was trying to weave it into why average “joe and jane American should be concerned…and the Anchor… Tyra Phillips (SP) I think …cut him off to go to “Breaking News” about Toyda appearing…(which wasn’t really “breaking news”) and she thanked him and hoped to have him on again “when there is more time.”
It’s everywhere that time is being limited for “nuanced” or oppositional viewpoints to whatever is the “Green Shoots” or else that is being promoted.
Just passing that incident along…but, I’ve noticed on CNBC the wierdness of the “rock music” fun and games that seems to be on a slide lately in their “fair and balanced” (what a hoot) coverage. It was better when Bush was in there ..for some reason. Of course, that’s just my view of it…but I’ve been a long time watcher of CNBC and MSNBC. So…my observation is my own…but based on what I’ve seen change.
“
February 24th, 2010 at 8:38 pm
Ah yes, the dumbing down of BananAmerica.
Nuanced? Don’t need no stinkin’ nuanced. Don’t need complete sentences.
Need emotion, hyperbole, anger. And depending on the media co and topic, you best be on their preferred side of issues.
Dumbed down sensationalism and emotion. National Enquirer/Murdoch style. For the sheeple.
And being the media talking heads they are, they are the most important people in the world. Their BS gets blasted world-wide, whether worth anything or not. Self-validating.
February 24th, 2010 at 8:48 pm
I noticed.
February 24th, 2010 at 8:59 pm
also…
It’s not just “financial nuance” it’s “political nuance” that seems to be suffering. Many voices “on the left” have had funding cut for their blogs and there is just a general lack of voices that were prominent in the past that were trying to point what was wrong with Government and Wall Street.
It’s like a “lock down.” This might not be the place for this because it’s Financial Site…but it’s everywhere. And, I’m a media/political watcher….long time.
Just putting my 2 cents out there. There’s something wrong. And Kudlow has always been OTT but he’s become a raving maniac lately. It’s all very strange.
February 24th, 2010 at 9:00 pm
I keep asking you: Why would you ever even do that channel? Its a waste of your time energy and intelligence. Any one who invests based on what they see on TV deserves to have their money lost.
February 24th, 2010 at 9:07 pm
You do it for a combination of factors — its fun, its an ego stroke, and (in theory) it can help your business.
And yes, its true, the laws of diminishing returns have long ago kicked in, and you do get less benefits with each subsequent appearance.
To me, the fun factor is probably the biggest reason
February 24th, 2010 at 9:11 pm
@BR: Fun factor? Try ego. :>) (snark)
February 24th, 2010 at 9:14 pm
I had noticed also. It’s not something that you should lose sleep over?!!
February 24th, 2010 at 9:16 pm
BR-
I saw you on some clips from a recent documentary-
“Zero Generation” -
liked what you had to say-
don’t remember you mentioning it- but maybe I missed it-
something that is not released yet? or maybe a small change type venue you didn’t bother to mention?
February 24th, 2010 at 9:18 pm
CNBC’s role in the great Corporatocracy that is the US is to lick the a**e of Wall Street. Those who don’t know the “Right” steps will not be invited to dance again?
February 24th, 2010 at 9:18 pm
God for you Barry, CNBC squawkcenter is rather useless anyway, and one good guest cannot save it.
February 24th, 2010 at 9:25 pm
man- I miss The Great CNBC Sucks- that dude had some great points all wrapped in satire-
dude vanished
February 24th, 2010 at 9:39 pm
TGCNBCS was beauty. I wandered around there the other day in wonder, so good, probably too early.
Obnoxious blog comments? That sounds like a challenge. I’ll try not to mess it up with nuance in the future.
BR, you have a great voice and you seem to like the radio thing. Go with that. How is the relationship with Bloomberg?
February 24th, 2010 at 9:41 pm
Yes..Great CNBC Sucks.. Miss that snark. Had a James Wolcott whiff about him…
February 24th, 2010 at 9:50 pm
call me ahab & TakBak04:
His site is down?
February 24th, 2010 at 9:54 pm
CNBC is in an economic fight for their lives.
Prime demographic numbers dropping like a rock followed closely by ad revenue. Desperately looking for a fix.
Throwing anything and everything up against the wall hoping against hope something works, something clicks that will stop the audience slide. They never learned GIGO
February 24th, 2010 at 9:56 pm
CJ & the 13th Apostle-
no- his site is still there-
but he’s done posting as of 12/31/2009-
even BR graced his presence- I think?
maybe BR can clarify
February 24th, 2010 at 9:57 pm
What’s her name on fast money that took over from Dylan….I don’t want to say, “the Asian Lady”. Oh, what the hell…
She ends up most analyst’s visits with a stoopid one liner for them all, “So, Tom, what the trade, what are you buying?”.
And most of these analysts and managers are so cliche on what makes their book, that I wonder, how do they actually perform, day in day out as such simpletons?
February 24th, 2010 at 9:57 pm
BR should do more of that morning show on Bloomberg. Posted here, I tuned in and felt Barry has “The Voice” for radio. Could do some great interviews especially with his eclectic interests.
Hopefully as the MSM seems to be getting more and more dumbed down, some new Media will fill the void. I can’t wait until I can get all the media I want through my internet over to my TV. I know there some capability but it’s not at the level yet for the average non-techie to want to deal with.
Barry Ritholtz and Friends shares Wall Street View with
Main Street. Getting some of the good folks from the “BP Think Tank” would be a start. I’d even pay to subscibe! I can’t see how long CNBC type stuff can last. When you have to use kinky songs and have 24/7 Pumpers on along with raving partisans…one might as well watch Faux News. Model is getting tired…
February 24th, 2010 at 10:08 pm
Jim Greeen- (wow 3 e’s)-
well if they would give folks like Dennis Kneale their own show-
well then- the sky’s the limit on viewership-
lol
February 24th, 2010 at 10:22 pm
not that I’m an expert on media but I think you’d do well for yourself and Fusion to stay away from CNBC generally, stick to Bloomberg, CNBC is a joke.
February 24th, 2010 at 10:32 pm
Barry, you might be able to get back in, given the recent changes at CNBC. If you want to that is. ;-)
I’m glad Charlie Gasparino is out as the on-air editor. His pushing of right-wing oriented, off topic discussions and comments through Kneale, Caruso-Cabrera, Kudlow, and Santelli made daytime CNBC thoroughly unwatchable, there’s a reason why CNBC’s ratings crashed. They should air the opinion segments and shows, like Kudlow’s, only after market hours, and leave the daytime to analytically oriented hosts and reporters. People watch CNBC during market hours to (hopefully) make money, not to hear opinion irrelevant to the goal of making money.
They seem to be getting a touch better now, banishing Michelle Caruso-Cabrera off the the netherlands of Vancouver for a couple of weeks, and limiting the gratuitous comments from Dennis Kneale some. The economics guy, Steve Liesman, seems to have more air time, hopefully they’ll give Bob Pisani more air time also. If they provide content and coverage which helps people make money, their ratings may actually recover some.
CNBC still has a LONG way to go though.
February 24th, 2010 at 10:37 pm
CNBC just ought to go the last step of their evolutionary path: have their anchors interview people’s house pets.
February 24th, 2010 at 10:45 pm
Barry,
That just Raises your Brand.
You should wear it like a Ribbon, “too smart for CNBC”.
You didn’t get the hint, that they wanted every negative CNBC comment deleted, like they are the Police of all opinion. Better yet, like children, CNBC tolerates no criticism. That only works when you have a monopoly. The age of One voice in media is over, they don’t get it and never will.
If NBC didn’t put their foot down, it would be All Kudlow and Dick Armey and that Trust fund baby Forbes, 24/7.
I’ve known you were “Not welcome” for quite some time, but so are many great people. They would boot Kass if they could. Booted Schiff right at the top.
I mean, come-on… they are a bunch of know nothing talking heads. And if Kernan knew anything, he would have been able to make a better living as a broker.
You should make a new click, of people too good for CNBC.
I’m sure CNBC sent the lawyers at CNBCSucks…
I feel stupid trying to point out that CNBC is filled with “Ignorant Morons”, If you didn’t realize that already, you don’t have any money.
February 24th, 2010 at 10:47 pm
Joe Kernan was out on vacation for two weeks: the best two weeks of SquawkBox in months. Becky & Steve Liesman were great, Melissa Lee sat in for a few days and was solid (and easy on the eyes), and Andrew Ross Sorkin of the Times was had a few outstanding moments.
They should trade Kernan and Kudlow to Fox Noise for an autographed Glen Beck crying towel and a tax break to be named at a future date. Joe and Kudlow: worse than useless.
Barry, when are you going to produce your own YouTube channel with guests of your choosing? The world could use some trenchant and informed commentary.
February 24th, 2010 at 10:49 pm
I like Becky — she is the smartest perosn on the network — and Steve is a decent guy (albeit way too sympathetic to the Fed folks he covers).
I’ve been playing with the idea of doing more video — its time consuming and expensive (camera man, equipment, editor for each runs ~$1-2k), but the costs could be mitigated with pre-roll ads.
Its definitely something worth thinking about . . .
February 24th, 2010 at 10:52 pm
If it wasn’t clear, Your Value as an advisor, just doubled.
Next time they suggest someone is more bullish or bearish, ask them what stocks they want you to have the opinion about.
“The producers just said I should be bearish on gold, so there you have it”
February 24th, 2010 at 10:59 pm
CNBS.
Celente predicts doing more video will replace the BS cable news.
February 24th, 2010 at 10:59 pm
Why does it increasingly seem like the media is not beholden to their viewers, but to the elite power brokers and the gov?
Makes TASS seem like the best of the best.
Anyone remember the bad mouth TASS got from the the US back when we were supposedly so pure and pristine?
Just real the Vanity Fair story about Taibbi in Russia. The thing that stuck was they would have never been permitted to do here what they did there.
The corps and lawyers would have shut them down in a day. And challenged them to hire lawyers to avoid jail time.
Hoe many times have contempt of court and fake charges been used as a weapon?
February 24th, 2010 at 11:00 pm
I’d never thought I’d say this, but Cramer is no longer the biggest buffoon on CNBC — the channel itself has passed Cramer to be a joke of itself.
They not only missed the 2000 crash — they dissed everyone who said tech stocks were pricey or zero rev dot coms were ridiculous — but they did it again in 2008-09 — and then they were running around panicking at the lows in March 2009 — they missed that too.
February 24th, 2010 at 11:02 pm
CNBC . should . just . kill . itself.
February 24th, 2010 at 11:02 pm
Who cares about corporate media. You are your own brand and your blog is top notch. You are a free spirit who is willing to make a call the way you see it, whether it is popular or not. That is so very rare.
You have access to great content and you come up with orginal intrepration that is filled with honesty and you write well. What you sound also do is an hour or two of internet radio a week maybe with a call in. You will be a natural at it. I am also sure that most of your contacts will do it, especially if it is original and you comes across like a bohemenian soul trying to find the truth (which you are) in the east village writing a “hard pain is going to fall” , “times they are a changing” and “all along the Fed tower”. You will tap a massive audience and you will not have to worry about some corporate elitist know it all thinking that you are nuanced. Would help you if I can.
February 24th, 2010 at 11:04 pm
We got rid of the TVs in the office years ago — it was a great decision that allowed us to make many contrary bets without infection fromt he usual mass hysteria — and now that we moved to new space, the Traders all want one on the trading desk.
I am now aiming at making the trading room the only TV zone . . .
February 24th, 2010 at 11:05 pm
Hey Barry,
About 3 months ago (maybe more), I was flipping channels and caught this documentary (Broke: The New American Dream)…..which you were interviewed for……
You said it best in this clip……you gotta wait till it’s about 30 or 35 seconds in…..
As long as you don’t drool or curse on the air, they’ll have you back on the air…..
February 24th, 2010 at 11:06 pm
Sorry, left link out…..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGGzMxnEM8A
February 24th, 2010 at 11:08 pm
Barry wrote: “I’ve been playing with the idea of doing more video… Its definitely something worth thinking about …”
H*ll ya – go for it! Get together with your “talking heads” friends, sketch out a dozen or so issues and let ‘er rip. Let’s see: how to fix TBTF, why the real estate industry needs to be completely overhauled, what to do about S&P, Moody’s, and Fitch, how to make the Volker rule work, and so on.
Why so expensive? Get some college/film school interns to work for buzz and brewskis this summer. Take ‘em out to the Hamptons a few times. Life is good.
You’ve got a built-in audience right here. Go for it!
February 24th, 2010 at 11:13 pm
You’re fab…don’t watch CNBC. TBP is one of the highest value informational outlets of my day. I’d love to see more quick video posts of you on this site. Give a hail if you find yourself coming to Seattle-Tacoma. I’d love to see you speak to an audience in person.
February 24th, 2010 at 11:15 pm
Its called access Journalism!
Its the equivalent of what you described as “regulatory capture.”
They spend so much time trying to reach the “right” people — the powers that be — that any resemblance to real journalism has faded away.
Its not news, its barely informative, its not very entertaining — you cant even call it infotainment!
Switch to Bloomberg . . .
February 24th, 2010 at 11:27 pm
I have heard intelligence defined as the ability to make distinctions.
What does “nuance” imply, if not the drawing of distinctions?
So Barry was told, in effect, that he was not stupid enough to be on Kudlow.
No great loss (for Barry, that is).
February 24th, 2010 at 11:34 pm
I notice your boy Paul Kedrosky is no longer on the channel anymore either
February 24th, 2010 at 11:58 pm
That was a nice story BR!
February 25th, 2010 at 12:10 am
I always enjoy you best on the Tech Ticker interviews, or really any you do one on one, where they actually give you a chance to talk through your ideas.
So many times they had you on CNBC coupled up with some crazy, or maybe three or four of them, and you wouldn’t get a lot of time despite the fact you were the only one that had anything worth saying.
February 25th, 2010 at 12:10 am
Barry, I expected a day would come when you wrote a post like this. You’re too good for them. (Actually, not to take anything away from you, we could say a *lot* of people are too good for them!) ;-)
February 25th, 2010 at 12:14 am
Remember the days that CNBC actually had useful info on it?
I for one like you better on Bloomberg Radio anyways. More time to actually discuss topics in depth. Not these stupid soundbites TV producers now want.
February 25th, 2010 at 12:37 am
Mr Ritholtz
when ever I did see you on Kudlow’s show, I could see the frustration on your face;
I have cut my viewership of CNBC because they are not really interested in real discussion
I gave up on Kudlow almost a year ago but the powers in charge give him more air time
The bean counters must be in charge as they continue to lose people
Some of the reporters are excellent but it is the talking heads I cannot stand;
February 25th, 2010 at 12:42 am
Like in all businesses, successful models are imitated until they no longer become successful.
The lesson that the news media business has taken from the last year is that as long as the lies you are saying are things that people want to hear, KEEP SAYING THEM!
Call it the “Lesson of Glenn Beck”.
News media is going actually where it has always gone. Whether it were travelers telling stories to people in a way that the people would expect to hear them or newspapers being partisan rags, non-biased reporting is actually kind of an anomaly if you look at the 3,000 year history of news.
And yet, I think there is a government solution to this. And no it wouldn’t involve massive government bureaucracies telling news organizations what they can and cannot say. It would actually be a very politically safe solution…..Just strengthen the nation’s libel laws. Make people scared of telling lies on public airwaves. Put the fear of multi-million dollar lawsuits hanging over their heads.
Now some might say, this would be wrong and would actually scare off a lot of people with valid opinions to say what they want to say. That is the case in Britain which has the world’s strongest libel laws.
I would agree. My solution would not come without costs. Many interesting op-eds would not be written. But at this point, I would gladly take boring BBC over the BS news organizations we have today, which because of our own idiocy compete not on who can provide the best coverage of important stories, but on who can provide the least nuance and the most shrill BS.
February 25th, 2010 at 12:58 am
CNBC has become much more orthodox right wing. It’s sad. Kernan dominates the morning. Haines dominates his period. Dennis Kneale dominates his segments. Cramer has taken to lambasting Obama in a way that he never did Bush–nevermind the hundred of thousands dead, millions displaced, and trillions of dollars spent–and he supports any policy towards the banks that will make their stocks rise in the short term. Kudlow…what’s there to say? Santelli is doing his best to usher in a true Depression.
Stiglitz, Krugman, and Dean Baker aren’t exactly in the CNBC rotation either Barry. You’re in pretty good company.
February 25th, 2010 at 1:50 am
I haven’t watched that awful channel in a year. I finally became saturated with the usual suspects (we all know who they are, and there are MANY, unfortunately)
I’m not a professional in the world of finance and when I first began following the markets regularly (daily), it began with tuning into CNBC. Although Kudlow drove me crazy, I made a point of watching him each night because I found his show to be generally well balanced with bulls and bears. Naturally, I took to the bear’s case because the story made the most sense (this is circa 2006). Through that program, I was introduced to a great number of professionals whose work, opinions, and BLOGS, I began to follow.
Unless that network is reduced to Mark Faber and Carl and Becky, I will very likely never watch another minute. However, I’m glad I put in the 4 years that I did, else I probably would not have found my way to the best financial blog on the planet (no names, right BR?).
I switched to Bloomberg exclusively and I lead a happier, fuller life for it. Food even tastes better.
I’ll take Tom and Ken in the mornings and Pimm in the afternoon over the drivel at CNBC any day. “If you have cash, you’re the king.” “There are huge pools of capital out there.” (Quotes from someone familiar which kick off “Taking Stock with Pimm Fox” each day at 5:00.)
By the way, why Faber, Carl, and Becky? Simply because they seem to be very pleasant people who aren’t attempting to jam their politics down your throat with every other sentence. Wow. What a concept. I don’t mind Leisman much either, but Barry hit it on the head – for me, he’s skewed just a bit too much to the defense of his fellow economists, and it seems that he cherry picks the data just a tiny bit. But that’s probably just because he’s a pleasant, glass-half-full kinda guy, while I think the glass has tipped over and there’s milk everywhere.
February 25th, 2010 at 2:06 am
The video at yahoo, looks like it’s done with almost no expense. People tolerate Youtube. you can do clean video with just a camera, and no skill. Have you seen the cramer video stuff? and editing can be done on any computer.
Simple video discussion would be a good addition to the site. Don’t overthink/over spend on it. 30 min with you and Kass having a beer would be Priceless. Even on a webcam. Ritholtz version of Charley rose.
There are certainly reasonable people on CNBC, but they are it is dominated by the Bully blowhards. And whoever produces that stuff is completely clueless, and they are just trying to get moved up to MSNBC, by proving they can provide “Compelling TV”. Squawk comes out like 3 highschool kids or siblings, “Playing TV”. It’s like they don’t even respect my time.
The discussion of economics, and the social implications, is much better on Morning Joe. It’s a great example of how, just about everyone, Treasury, White House, Krugman, anyone with a brain, Can’t stand the Joke that is CNBC. When you compare how people are on any other show, you realize that half the economic world, acts like cnbc is like talking to people on “The Short Bus”. or like they are talking to 5 year olds.
The big debate “In the Real world” is if EMH is dead, Which it is, but watching CNBC is like something from the 1950′s, and you won’t even hear that discussion(of course now some hack from CNBC, will see this and they will do it), but the idea that there might be some development in economics, beyond Friedman.
Or how about Lemon socialism, how everyone talks “FreeMarket” on the top, and then when the market is low, they come out screaming for stimulus. You won’t hear that discussed, since you can roll the tape back to everyone on the network screaming “HELP US”, and now they run around talking about how, the market knows best, and government best stay out of markets. But you can’t have that discussion. It would bruise too many cnbc EGO’s.
I mean… MY GOD!!! how dare anyone talk about Modern Economics… since we have to be stuck with the dopes at the back of the bus, with our heads up our ass, talking the latest in University of Colorado economics 101, from 1965.
February 25th, 2010 at 2:14 am
Kill your television.
February 25th, 2010 at 2:26 am
There is room in the Web 3.0 market for discussion of “Modern Economics”
Barry does his version of Charley Rose.
February 25th, 2010 at 2:39 am
After the last awkward standoff with Kernen, I can’t see David Rosenberg getting invited back either. They sure know how to eliminate those with resaoned opinions against their own doctrine. Fair and balanced, just like Faux.
February 25th, 2010 at 4:19 am
This sums it up nicely http://www.cnbc.com/id/35324843
February 25th, 2010 at 6:03 am
I was at a luncheon last week with one of the “frequent contributors” to CNBC. During the Q&A, I asked about his experience with CNBC and he was pretty low key. Asked him to contrast his unsubstantiated bullishness against TBP and he claimed not to know much. He was even making book recommendations about how we are in the situation we are in today without mentioning “Bailout.” Not sure if it is a conspiracy or just uninformed, but your post BR reminded me of the conversation.
February 25th, 2010 at 6:41 am
congrats on to the lunch bunch,
they do have a tough gig, everyone clicks clicks clicks, thus, it’s priority number 1 to create a car crash on screen to get folks to slow down and qauwk for a few minutes
end product it’s tough on morale for most of em, cause that is not there passion creating car crash’s, nor, a guests
imho, nuance is not the problem, it is the emotional response to nuance, it makes u question your believe system, which then requires quite a bit of education
so, they ain’t in the educating business, or news/journalism biz, they in dee eyeball bizz
overall, breaking news flash is qualified under the parameters of something happened, which only happens every second
fwiw, think twice about the video stuff, i understand you’re cost issue cause you want the highest quality, thus, maybe try 3-5 really meaningfull ones you’re passionate about and see if you like it
i’ll watch it, again, thanks for the honesty on this issue, as always refreshing
February 25th, 2010 at 6:43 am
lol, eric davis, i would love that format, me loves some charlie boy, fwiw, that is my dream job, to talk too passionate people about passionate things in depth
February 25th, 2010 at 7:18 am
I say this not to be cruel, harsh or rude but, I won’t be missing you. That’s simply because I gave up on CNBC a year ago and have barely turned it on since. There was a time when their financial reporting was decent and they had some credible journalists. But at some point over the last couple of years, and I can’t pinpoint when, they changed and it was not for the better. It seems to be endemic to broadcast media in general and my suspicion is that it is a response to increased competition. They have courted the viewer with glitz, twinkies, looks, etc, all at the expense of sound reporting. CNBC is no different. Perhaps in CNBC’s case some of the changes were exacerbated by by the criticisms that the financial press and broadcast media received in what and how they reported during the unfolding of the financial crisis and the ensuing market meltdowns.
You, BR, hit the nail on the head with your post to Joe Kernan last year. In the absence of good, credible reporting via the mainstream media those that have something to say that is worth listening to will find their audience happily waiting on the net. It has become my preferred medium for following financial news, and I am ever thankful to the many who undertake the task of openly and freely sharing both information and views. This site in particular has become one of my mainstays.
So, congrats to the lunch group – you got it right. But, please keep the info flow coming because many of us value what you have to say but we have lost our taste for and ability to endure the popular press.
February 25th, 2010 at 7:36 am
[...] Read more here. [...]
February 25th, 2010 at 7:43 am
Have you ever been invited to do CNBC Europe?
The presenters over there seem much more interested in a good considered debate, rather than a one sided stacked-octobox shoutfest as seen in America.
I particularly enjoy their discussions with Hugh Hendry when he is on.
For that matter CNBC TV-18 in India has produced some good interviews as well, something you’d never see from Dennis Kneale/Cramer. I wonder why it’s like this?
Might have to engage in some CNBC ratings arbitrage!
February 25th, 2010 at 7:45 am
BR you sound sad, cheer up, being persona non grata at CNBC is a sign that you speak the truth.
February 25th, 2010 at 7:55 am
Barry Ritholtz Says:
“…..I’ve been playing with the idea of doing more video — its time consuming and expensive (camera man, equipment, editor for each runs ~$1-2k), but the costs could be mitigated with pre-roll ads…..”
“…Its definitely something worth thinking about . . .”
We’re waiting on ya, bro. My whole reason for chasing down this web blog had *everything* to do with your appearances on C-Span which displayed to your New Yawk feet-to-the-fire ,no bullshit , the buck stops here persona & delivery which I found refreshing…in other words what’s entirely missing from cable business news.
http://www.booktv.org/Program/10594/Bailout+Nation+How+Greed+and+Easy+Money+Corrupted+Wall+Street+and+Shook+the+World+Economy.aspx
It’s highest time for a financial news Howard Beal because enough of us , and plenty of regular folks I know & love , are made as hell and not going to take it ( Wall St. Bullshit ) anymore.
I guess I preferred your book tour performance at one of my old haunts at the New Book revue in downtown Huntington , L. I. Barry you’d be perfect and you would bring on *genuine* contrarian opinions to just have it.
Hang the production costs , that’s what online advertising is and that’s what college media student interns are for. ;-)
and the college market who is graduating into a jobless economy would be your best fans and buzz factor. I’d be happy to promote in throughout my network and friends of friends of friends …you get the picture. Who here wouldn’t?.
My only suggestion would be to go the direction that Fox went with in having the setting as a roundtable discussion in a bar of your choice. Where Fox completely goes of the rails is the Happy Hour *happy talk* with all its inherent insipidness . Instead make it a gathering of hard-bitten financial cynics calling it like it is. Call the *Trading Pit & the Pendulum* or something. It’s cable / iNet so no holds barred.
Do it, Barry ,Just Do It!
February 25th, 2010 at 7:56 am
I’ve also noticed Cramer becoming more and more nuanced recently. I wish he would stop equivocating so much…
February 25th, 2010 at 8:11 am
[...] Why Barry and others rarely do CNBC anymore. (TBP) [...]
February 25th, 2010 at 8:21 am
Barry – You should consider it an honor.
CNBC has been on the long, downhill slide for many years now, starting when they made a conscious corporate decision back in the 90′s to became the global cheerleaders for the tech bubble.
They ended that decade pumping the market with stock picks from celebrities and professional wrestlers (how could THEY be wrong?) and completely missed that crash.
Then, they rolled out a new “product line” of political ideologues, pumping out their drek with greater and greater intensity through the last decade (Kudlow the Klown’s “Greatest Story” BS, etc), denying there was a housing bubble, and missed that crash also.
Now, they’ve enbarked on the next leg of their death march toward the ultimate low, with bells and whistles, wacky sound effects, carnival barkers and dancing bears, people screaming at each other, and more useless garbage.
I’m guessing that if they thought they could get away with it, they’d have those bimbos strutting around in bikinis and high heels in front of the numbers boards, in a desparate effort to try and gin up some ratings; somehow, someway.
So how does any of their drivel make anyone any money?
Well, it doesn’t, and that might just explain their sinking viewership.
Many years ago, I think it was around 2001, Jim Grant was on there (another smart guy that is apparently Persona non Grata), and he opined to Maria the Bimbo that US Equities might have entered a long term secular bear market.
The Bimbo asked, “Well, how long will that last, and when will it be over?”
Jim Grant responded, as the Bimbo sipped her coffee, (paraphrasing) “Oh, I don’t know, maybe when the general interest in equities becomes so low that CNBC becomes the “all soccer” network.
As the Bimbo’s coffee came spewing out of her nose, they cut to commercial…
Jim Grant may very well be eventually proven right.
February 25th, 2010 at 8:33 am
@JK:
You nailed it (the root of the problem). WELL SAID!
I blasted an email to NPR’s money whatever program and they had a report call me and ask a butload of questions. I believe it was a slam on AGW and the economy. She basically explained when I offered they talk to a scientist that they didn’t want to and then went into how they were very interested in feeding the average Joe/Jane what surveys showed they wanted to hear.
Un-F*cking-Believable.
Santa Clause, the Tooth Ferry, and the Bunny Rabbit vs reality.
Blue pill media mongers.
February 25th, 2010 at 8:49 am
At least David Weidner at the WSJ thinks you’re persona grata, Barry.
Ten Wall Street Blogs You Need To Bookmark Now
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704240004575085901098514146.html
February 25th, 2010 at 9:07 am
“Dumbing down of the discourse…”
Would that be possible?
February 25th, 2010 at 9:11 am
If she’s cute she’s a bimbo, if she’s not she’s a warthog. No wonder some guys can’t get laid.
February 25th, 2010 at 9:35 am
CNBC, is ‘Show Bizness’ every thing else, is mash potatoes!
February 25th, 2010 at 9:48 am
BR, lest we ever forget what TV is all about: ratings. It’s just a shame that you don’t get to voice a contrarian point of view in an arena as big as CNBC. I used to listen a lot on the way to work each morning, via Sat Rad, but just don’t care to hear it anymore. Bloomberg is much better. And First Wave, Channel 22, is the best of all of them.
February 25th, 2010 at 10:01 am
Bloomberg TV and radio is head & shoulders above the rest. I haven’t watched CNBC in over a year – it had moved beyond amusing to painful, the daytime cheerleaders were nauseating. Cramer is at least entertaining in small doses but Kudlow is a klown.
February 25th, 2010 at 10:05 am
CNBC SUCKS must have been hounded into silence by legal threats from CNBC, probably just ground him down with legal expenses.
He should have a suit made up with CNBC SUCKS all over it like Matthew Lesko’s dollar bills suit
February 25th, 2010 at 10:11 am
When I was subscribed to a cheaper Dish Network package, I did NOT get the Bloomberg or the Fox Business channels. Not even CNBC-World.
So I upgraded to their 250 level package, and now get all those channels, and haven’t looked at the CNBC channel since. Don’t miss their ‘know-more-than-their-guests’ attitudes. Don’t miss having to listen to the anchors’ political bias.
Just wish that CNBC didn’t have a monopoly on the cheaper packages. (YES, I’ve told Dish Network).
Don’t know about DirecTV, or the cable companies.
February 25th, 2010 at 10:13 am
It has been almost a year since I watched CNBS but recently tuned back in (briefly). I can’t believe they have the same tired old talent such as John what;s his name the political hack, baldy the pseudo economist (he actually has a one year certificate in economics journalism and a liberal arts degree from a state college in Buffalo), that Erin person and to my shock wall to wall Cramer.
Bloomberg radio is by far the best out there with the exception of that Hayes person. If Bloomy TV were smart they would go the simulcast route in the AM as the radio talent far exceeds their television offerings.
February 25th, 2010 at 10:14 am
BR,
I am one of those few regular visitors to your blog, who probably disagrees with you on most of your political rants/leanings. However, as someone who respects you enormously and values your opinions, may I offer a couple of suggestions:
1. Maybe you need to talk to Aaron and Blodget at Tech Ticker and see if they can have you on for an extended period of time rather than three 5 to 7 minute clips. Those guys are not over the top and I like their spectrum of guests. You guys could potentially have a weekly segment of three clips (around 15 minutes each).
2. Since you want to engage in some ego-stroking, why not have a podcast of your own (maybe, make it a weekly effort) — I would urge you to check out Adam Carolla’s podcasts. After he got fired early last year by the local CBS radio station in LA, he basically decided to do his own thing — no radio producers yelling instructions, no limits on what he can or can;t say, etc. You could entertain calls from listeners, your brand name is extremely solid (thanks to the blog), you could have the guests of your choice to have meaningful debates and discussions….I’m sure some of your media-savvy friends could help you monetize this effort to the extent of at least recovering your “production” costs.
Keep doing the good work. Those of us who are younger than you and not as market/life savvy keep learning from you all the time (and yes, some of us may have disagreements with you but that’s what makes it fun to come to your blog).
February 25th, 2010 at 10:36 am
That’s funny, because CNBC and all MSM content has become “persona non grata” to me. It’s their loss, Barry.
February 25th, 2010 at 10:46 am
Larry Kudlow is an ass.
EOM
February 25th, 2010 at 11:04 am
schirimiester Says:
February 25th, 2010 at 10:46 am
” Larry Kudlow is an ass.”
Make that a *braying* ass.
Damn that blowhard just keeps bloviating & bloviating his supply-side cheerleading Bush-wah like he’s leaving for Fox Snooze tomorrow. The kille is he has had some decent guests on certain key issue, but damn his poor manners in letting someone else finish a complete thought. My standard for how it’s done is still Willaim F. Buckley ( Firing Line ) & Charlie Rose.
February 25th, 2010 at 11:14 am
BR you’ll know you’ve made it to the grown-up table when you get invited on Canadian financial TV with Rosie.
~~~
BR: I do Canadian TV all the time.
February 25th, 2010 at 11:14 am
[...] a CNBC guest… Barry Ritholtz writes about the inclination to be a guest on CNBC… I had lunch the other day with several other analysts, [...]
February 25th, 2010 at 11:35 am
Foxification says it all. Blurring the line between real reporting and talking heads. As in creating the perception that the talking heads are reporting news when they are instead talking based on their own biases and opinions.
What is with the cutting off serious guests for this breaking news BS. The other day they cut off a guest to report that the Toyota had ended? Hello! not important!!!!
February 25th, 2010 at 1:10 pm
[...] Why “nuanced voices” are persona non grata at CNBC. (Big Picture) [...]
February 25th, 2010 at 2:29 pm
[...] One of the smartest guys out there is “too nuanced” for CNBC. Good. That station doesn’t deserve “nuanced,” let alone “thought.” . . . With Dylan gone, I dont hear from Fast Money, and with Kudlow, I was told I was “too nuanced“– a phrase that is hardly ever used to describe me. . . . Blog Posts, Interesting: … none Edit in Admin [...]
February 25th, 2010 at 3:11 pm
BR, this is possibly the best thing for your brand. Seriously, if I was frozen out of that box of fools, I’d put it on my resume as one of my proudest moments.
If you haven’t seen this, it captures the idiocy of that clownshow: http://www.cjr.org/feature/waiting_for_cnbc_1.php?page=all. MUST READ. YOU WILL LAUGH.
But I have to admit, I like Michelle CaCa’s DDs. Not very nuanced, but neither are movies.
February 25th, 2010 at 3:46 pm
[...] to make today all me-media all the time, but since people asked, here are the links to the 3 Yahoo segments I recorded yesterday: • Weak New Home Sales Report [...]
February 25th, 2010 at 4:46 pm
The model I would use is the old fashioned faith healing revival in a tent. All of the “injured people” selected are part of the act and the minister is told in advance who to pick and what their ailment is. The other people, the real people, who came in to be ‘healed’ are never the wiser and think they just didn’t get picked but continue to believe. They exist to be used and fleeced. CNBC is no different than a tent revival or the Duke and Dauphin. Hence, “nuance” being a bad thing. Also blame John McLaughlin who started the whole concept of a substance-free shout-fest.
February 25th, 2010 at 4:59 pm
” Foxification” I coined that…..!….And i’m a blue collar stiff…
February 25th, 2010 at 6:58 pm
Barringo, there’s never been anything about you that’s “nuanced.” CNBC is 50% pablum, 40% passable content and 10% brilliance.
Later,
Rondy
February 25th, 2010 at 7:00 pm
Hey, Barry.
Read your post on CNBC. Damn, sorry to hear that. Just wanted you to know I always welcome your commentary — be it your thoughts on the daily market activity or quirky economic stories for my blog
February 25th, 2010 at 7:10 pm
30 Rock did a quite funny send-up of the CNBC interview format (the “Hot Box” lol); Alec Baldwin is great in this role.
http://www.hulu.com/watch/127893/30-rock-the-hot-box-with-avery-jessup
~~~
BR: Saw it last week — Hysterical — I’ll get that embed code!
February 26th, 2010 at 6:37 am
Foxification occurred when Roger Ailes realized after Watergate , Vietnam and the Pentagon papers we Americans no longer wanted the truth about yourselves. We were tired of it. We wanted to go back to Ozzie and Harriet and get in our cars , get on the highway system President Eisenhower built and go shopping ..He was right. The total and complete failure of our press to cover our march to war with Iraq is prefect example of Foxification. The democrats have been foxified. Clearly the Clintons have been foxified. Most of you Wall Street yuppies have been foxified. The Supreme Court has been foxified.. Look at the TV ratings Roger Ailes gets. He beats all the rest. And he often beats them all combined. You add foxification to lowering interests rate and a powerful bull market and you create a culture that will eat its own young…………And you people thought heroine and sex and Woodstock was bad…….We don’t think, we repeat the thoughts of others ….We have been foxified and the unborn will pay the price