Most Consequential Economy/Business Commentators in US?
Tunku Varadarajan of NYU and the Daily Beast (formerly of the WSJ Op-Ed pages) asks this interesting question:
If you were to put together a list of the “Top Dozen most consequential commentators in the American media on the economy/business” who would you include?
Recall that we previously assisted Tunku with his Most Influential Journalists (by Political Orientation)
He adds:
As always, a few rules: If we limit this list to journalist-commentators (exclude the academics who write frequently for the popular media Roubini, John Taylor, Robert Frank etc.). This is not a list of the most consequential economists, for therein lies mayhem! If we include the FT.com as part of the “American” media, and, of course, blogs, TV, and magazines; and the list will strive to be heterodox.
A classic example of someone who fits the bill would be James Grant, or Martin Wolf.
~~~
Tonite’s crowd query: Who are the most “consequential” economy/business commentators?
Tweet
Facebook
Reddit
Digg this!
September 28th, 2010 at 6:02 pm
Here is the list I gave Tunku:
-St. Warren Buffet about anything
-Krugman about political economics
-Joseph Stiglitz and Simon Johnson seems to be garnering some influence
-Alan Abelson regarding skepticism
-Matt Taibbi on the zeitgeist of the moment
-Roubini has become the king of recession porn
-Taleb about anything regarding systemic probabilities
-Bill Fleckenstein about Valuations
-Jim Cramer has influence, but I cannot figure out about what he is influencing
-Einhorn and Ackman about Hedge funds
-Dylan Ratigan has been all over Bailouts and campaign corruption -Fred Hickey about Tech
-Tunku already named Martin Wolf and James Grant, I would also add the NYT troika — Gretchen Morgenson, Floyd Norris, and boy wonder Andrew Ross Sorkin
I would be remiss if i didn’t include Jon Stewart, whose work on Banks and Wall St has been outstanding
September 28th, 2010 at 6:23 pm
“Consequential”? I’m stumped. Seems like only “the people on the inside” (of the Fed, the banks, the administration, the lobbyists’ offices) are of any “consequence”. Journalist-commentators and voters are seemingly of no consequence.
I guess I’m either dodging the question (because I don’t know) or protesting it…
September 28th, 2010 at 6:26 pm
Hmm…maybe Mike Shedlock “Mish” as one. Can’t say I agree with him much, but maybe that’s why I think he’s relevant.
September 28th, 2010 at 6:27 pm
“Consequential” is a hefty word. I assume it means someone who can move markets, not necessarily someone who is most popular or wise.
Jim Rogers comes to mind. Warren Buffett? In a past era you could say Dan Dorfman.
September 28th, 2010 at 6:38 pm
Consequntial = influential.
Who is influencing markets, traders & policymakers ?
September 28th, 2010 at 6:39 pm
What wunsacon said: “Consequential” implies an impact on policy and I’m not sure how to evaluate that but since Tunku mentions Martin Wolf I’ll second that: Wolf knows his economics, writes very clearly and shows respect for the intelligence of his audience.
September 28th, 2010 at 6:47 pm
Bill Moyers, Felix Salmon, Joe Nocera, Floyd Norris, James Surowicki (sp?), Justin Fox, Matt Bai (for better or worse), and (I’m not sure if he counts) Bruce Bartlett…
Wish I had more from the ‘right’ but can’t seem to think of any Washington Post columnists! hahahaha
First on the list would be the guy who wrote the New Yorker article on healthcare though: Atul Gawande
September 28th, 2010 at 7:08 pm
Stephen Roach, Morgan Stanley Asia – although now at Yale and commenting only occasionally.
Eric Janszen of iTulip.com.
And your influence is pretty wide Barry.
September 28th, 2010 at 7:09 pm
Tom Keene…BTW…Is crowd query actually crowd resourcing ?
~~~
BR: Partially. But I find it helps to keep the comments focused on the topics on other posts . . .
September 28th, 2010 at 7:19 pm
FT Alphaville
September 28th, 2010 at 7:22 pm
Tyler Durden?
September 28th, 2010 at 7:48 pm
Jesse Eisinger of Pro Publica
September 28th, 2010 at 7:58 pm
Everyone on Fox “News” and CNN Finance are worthless hacks kissing up to sell corporate trash to the US investor. I.E. Cramer.
Krugman, Floyd Norris of the NYT and yourself are the only trustworthy sources I read.
Ralph Nader also knows it’s Corporations vs. Everyone else as well.
EconTalk: for Economics taught badly, and economics as propaganda for the rich.
September 28th, 2010 at 8:20 pm
I will second Tom Keene
September 28th, 2010 at 8:23 pm
As much as I hate to admit it, James Cramer . . .
September 28th, 2010 at 8:31 pm
NPR broke some news during the CDO/CDS collapse — they have a lot of influence
September 28th, 2010 at 8:32 pm
Jim Cramer/Ben Stein/Kudlow/Glen Beck
~~~
BR: Glen Beck is economically influential? Ben Stein? Kudlow?
September 28th, 2010 at 8:34 pm
Unfortunately, Mark Zandi and Paul Krugman.
Tom Keene
Michael Lewis
Bill Gross
The late great Mark Pittman (RIP)
September 28th, 2010 at 8:35 pm
“Who is influencing markets, traders & policymakers ?”
______________
Now that I ink about it in those terms, it’s probably some Chinese dude.
September 28th, 2010 at 8:40 pm
NYT’s David Leonhardt: When he mentioned a section of BN in the NYT (nine months before it was published), the phones went crazy.
It was a surprise to me just how influential the NYT is compared to the WSJ, Washington Post, Barron’s, etc.
September 28th, 2010 at 8:45 pm
I like what you do in general. The commentary that the others mentioned do is fine, helps to establish a field, but creating content and providing context/structure as well as a forum is a value add- I guess, Mr. Ritholtz, the VAT on your value-add is a touch of existential angst. Pay the tax and smile. This is a very fine blog and a good space where a contribution is made. So enjoy the rabelaisian folderol of it all. It’s fun on occasion.
Nice quote by Russell, (though my gut says to ignore it…)
September 28th, 2010 at 8:48 pm
Subtext- ‘most’ is an unappealing criterion. I suspect that the ones who influence ‘most’ with their commentary do it in private.
September 28th, 2010 at 9:07 pm
If this were the UK, I would nominate Ambrose Evan-Pritchard.
Who is the AE-P of the US? Who has a firmly held point of view that speaks to both policy and the markets, and that has been proven to be right? That person does not exist here.
September 28th, 2010 at 9:13 pm
The MSM marginalizes any potentially “consequential commentators” systematically, especially in regards to the “economy/business”. So, I’ll just say that they are all about the same. If I could think of anyone who stands out I would give that person credit… but nobody comes to mind. But then I ignore the MSM in the US, so I could simply be missing somebody “consequential”.
September 28th, 2010 at 9:18 pm
BR: Your parameter was so narrow…felt you were fishing for something. Meaning looking for something you could focus on NEW from folks who read your blog… who are Traders.
Who is influencing Markets/Policymakers is a different question it would seem to this observer than “who” influences traders.
Maybe that’s what you were trying to “suss out?” The differences.
Anyway…seemed an odd question that is more narrow than most of your readers or myself would get on first glance.
Who influences Traders? is what you are asking. Or, do you mean WHO influences Traders, Markets and Policy Makers? That’s lumping three together. Hard to know that. Could it be Hunches, Prechter, God or Allah/Goddess and the FED Policy of Bernanke? The Fed would seem to be of the most influence these days with ZIRP and worries about ZIRP ending and the dreaded “Inflation” setting in. It’s all they talk about on CNBC for months now.
Sorry…I read many sites but felt you weren’t asking who we read that influences us…because you ruled out the “usuals.”
~~~
BR: If you read the post, I am quoting Tunku . . .
September 28th, 2010 at 9:20 pm
No question….Ron Insana and Peter Boockvar.
September 28th, 2010 at 9:26 pm
Ok…to be serious….would toss out folks like Michael Lewis and Matt Taibbi. They don’t influence traders, AT ALL, but their work “causes a stir” in the hierarchy.
September 28th, 2010 at 9:58 pm
“It was a surprise to me just how influential the NYT is compared to the WSJ, Washington Post, Barron’s, etc.”
As an outsider (not in finance or economics) WSJ and Barrons, FT, etc. reek of ‘inside baseball’, and often feel very predictable (and not always fact-based if you know what I mean). They also have paywalls, so unless you are seriously into wall street probably not worth it (although you can always copy the headline, paste into google, and voila! free!).
The bigger issue is that these days people listen to economists, so why listen to journalists when the economists themselves all have blogs and op eds for consumption? Why listen to a reporter when you can read Krugman,Baker, DeLong, Holz-Eakins, the Minnesota Fed, etc. on their blogs?
September 28th, 2010 at 10:04 pm
Agree with Petey- Someone in China and Saudi Arabia.
Since the Fed/Paulson Tag team calls Buffett and Volker after a policy decision, I would say those 2.
September 28th, 2010 at 10:06 pm
Sorry, Volcker and I forgot to throw in those Pimco guy’s.
September 28th, 2010 at 10:09 pm
Andy T:
Ron Insana? Seriously?
September 28th, 2010 at 10:14 pm
Not quite A level but would call out Simon Johnson and James Kwak @ Baseline Scenario.
While I think one has to be somewhat skeptical as he is talking his book, but then again he has the biggest book on the Street, Bill Gross.
September 28th, 2010 at 10:17 pm
David Rosenberg and his Bond-Bullion Barbell
September 28th, 2010 at 10:26 pm
Meredith Whitney.
September 28th, 2010 at 10:34 pm
I wish we could put Mr. Volcker at the top of the list.
September 28th, 2010 at 10:35 pm
Chris Whalen, Josh Rosner, Jim Bianco, Doug Kass, Howard Lindzon
September 28th, 2010 at 10:39 pm
Ariana Huffington
September 28th, 2010 at 10:41 pm
My blog list includes
Baseline Scenario
Big Picture
Calculated Risk
Credit Writedowns
Economist’s View
Krugman
Mankiw
Naked Capitalism
Vox eu
September 28th, 2010 at 10:51 pm
Don’t forget the Stock Rabbi!
September 28th, 2010 at 11:02 pm
Calculated Risk, James Galbraith, Marshall Auerback, Bill Mitchell, Randall Wray, Paul Krugman, Joe Stiglitz, Yves Smith
September 28th, 2010 at 11:08 pm
“-Taleb about anything regarding systemic probabilities”
Oh, my, really?
“Definition of CONSEQUENTIAL
1: of the nature of a secondary result : indirect
2: consequent
3: having significant consequences : important
4: self-important ”
Taleb definitely fits #4, I’ve never seen anyone so awestruck by the beauty of his own opinion.
Let’s face it, he got right once and in every interview I’ve ever stuck thru with him everything he said boiled down to: “hey, you know, sometimes sh*t happens. . .” But I could be wrong . . .
September 28th, 2010 at 11:24 pm
i like dean baker @ cepr – that guy posts everywhere!
karl denninger @ the market ticker when he sticks to economy / stocks / money / how government influences – tune him out when he goes into his tea bagger mode ( ugh )
September 28th, 2010 at 11:30 pm
David Rosenberg. He’s right there with Calculated Risk and the modern monetary team (although he’s behind these others)…
September 28th, 2010 at 11:39 pm
would like to add Duncan Black ( Atrios ) @ Eschaton
PhD from London School of Economics but very common sensical and calls ‘em as he sees ‘em.
been reading him for his 8 years of blogging. good stuff.
September 28th, 2010 at 11:39 pm
You guys here may just call it investment porn, but I’d put Aaron Task and Henry Blodget over at Yahoo Finance’s Tech Ticker on the list. Maybe they don’t influence the folks managing funds on Wall Street, but they have a heck of a following from individual investors. And I think they both fit the “Journalist-Commentator” requirement a whole lot better than the hedge fund managers and academicians listed above.
September 28th, 2010 at 11:55 pm
Agree with many of the names above. A few others:
Rogoff and Reinhart
Bill Black
Soros
Pre-Roubini-Dr. Doom/Goldfinger Marc Faber
…
Barry, your list looks good for a “MSM-centric” list. But, something bothers me about seeing the NYT “troika” ahead of names like Yves Smith, Mish, Tyler Durden, CR/Bill McBride (although he seems to avoid opining too strongly on matters and seems to stick to “just the facts”) , you, and some of the others folks suggested. Why? Well, at least consider that bloggers foresaw the disaster and explained it well ahead of the MSM. Why should you give the “troika” credit — just for having more eyeballs?
What am I missing? Did that troika see subprime coming and that it was more than just subprime? What year?
Yes, there’s that term “consequential”. And “more eyeballs” = “more consequential”. Convenient for the MSM, huh? Well, Rasputin was “consequential”.
September 29th, 2010 at 12:35 am
What jpmist and Lil Leg Humper said. Well, maybe not “consequential,” but faves.
Consequential: Ned Davis? Doug Kass? Bill Gross? Jeremy Siegel?
And a couple of the very worst:
Robert Kiyosaki? Kevin Hassett?
September 29th, 2010 at 12:56 am
OK…since no one else would dare say it….
Karl Denninger
Followed by Tyler Durden (et. al), Mish Sherlock, Barry Ritholtz, David Rosenburg, Merideth Withney.
Anyone who said James Cramer….go give yourself 50 lashes
September 29th, 2010 at 1:41 am
the board of directors of the peoples bank of china
he who has the money is always the most influential. one peep from them and it is stop the clock.
the guy that got the last decade correct is marc faber who wrote the book on quest for gold. easily the best trade of the decade.
the question seems silly though. consequential to my pocketbook or to sales of their books and how many loops on television they are played.
or the better question is who cares if that latter is the question. amerikan idol and idiocracy has come to the financial papers.
i loved wall st so much better when nobody knew who the fed chairmen was. they fucked it good by making it a sport. must be all the jocks on wall street that never made the real big leagues and have issues from adolescent days when they couldn’t throw the fastball.
September 29th, 2010 at 3:43 am
Howard Lindzon and Stock twits are supplanting MSM
September 29th, 2010 at 8:21 am
Petey Wheatstraw Says:
September 28th, 2010 at 8:32 pm
Jim Cramer/Ben Stein/Kudlow/Glen Beck
~~~
BR: Glen Beck is economically influential? Ben Stein? Kudlow?
______________
Glen Beck can get a million dumb-asses buying the least valuable form of gold on the plant, at a huge premium. If that’s not influence, what is? As for Ben Stein and Kudlow, they make their livings off of their abilities to influence — rightly or wrongly, they do.
As for anyone else, apparently some mighty idiotic folks are influencing policy. Otherwise, we wouldn’t be in this mess.
The blogs are influential to those who want to penetrate the veneer of legitimacy provided by the Corporatist MSM, but only those who don’t speak publicly, or who speak publicly in gibberish and through massaged statistics (banks and government officials) influence policy.
_____________
Whoever said Denninger or Mish, above, ignores their obvious focuses on their personal pet peeves. Many times, they are correct in their analysis of things economic, but more frequently, their political prejudices result in myopia and tunnel vision.
September 29th, 2010 at 8:42 am
Krugman, I think, has moved up a long way in the last two years by the simple technique of always having a factual basis for what he says, and posting it. That has a strong cumulative effect.
Volcker, as others have said – if only he were currently in a more powerful position!
September 29th, 2010 at 8:52 am
@ Petey: you said: “Whoever said Denninger or Mish, above, ignores their obvious focuses on their personal pet peeves. Many times, they are correct in their analysis of things economic, but more frequently, their political prejudices result in myopia and tunnel vision.”
Obviously you do not read Denninger. Yeah, he holds nothing back … so what. He is spot on in his analysis.
September 29th, 2010 at 8:53 am
Times change, the Keynesians are hustled offstage and are replaced by the crowd- pleasing sadists such as Glenn Beck and Sarah ‘I Can Too Count To Ten’ Palin.
What was the question again?
September 29th, 2010 at 9:53 am
Harvey Pack.
September 29th, 2010 at 10:37 am
David Rosenberg, Jim Bianco, Meredeth Whitney, Nouriel Roubini (like it or not), Barry Ritholtz and of course Martin Wolf.
The sad sad sad sad truth is that I actually agree with the poster to wrote “Jim Cramer/Ben Stein/Kudlow/Glen Beck”.
I think enough (read millions) unimaginable inept people follow them like the sheep they are. People tend to do what is easy over what is best.
September 29th, 2010 at 10:39 am
I forgot to mention the “PIMCO Two” and StockTwits
September 29th, 2010 at 11:16 am
Jim Rogers?
September 29th, 2010 at 1:02 pm
I wouldn’t go so far as to say that Kudlow has had no effect on public opinion… opinion about the effects of various government policies on the economy (his stock market prognostications are another matter entirely). Certainly, Obama himself couldn’t care less about what Kudlow thinks about anything. But Kudlow does have an audience, between his CNBC appearances, and his writings for National Review.
September 29th, 2010 at 1:19 pm
I stop and listen when Pimco speaks, so I’d add:
Mohammed El-erian
Paul McCauley
September 29th, 2010 at 2:22 pm
to name a few…
Santelli on bonds and currencies
El-erian on macro
Pettis on China
Holland of SCMP on things Greater Chinaish and HK specific
Ambrose Evans Pritchard on everything in euro land and whatever else on his mind
FT’s Martin Wolf on anything he writes about
Ty Durden
Mundell on anything currency related
Gasparino adds zest and is real
and to spice it up…those “economic commentators” who i avoid…to name a few
CRAMER!!!…the Joe Granville of his generation
Buffett…we are continuoulsy getting Buffetted out here…he’s become the Brittany Spears of CNBC
Larry Summers
Barney Frank
POTUS
September 29th, 2010 at 6:17 pm
from the uk:
robert peston
martin wolf
mervyn king
willem buiter
alistair darling
vince cable
ambrose
will hutton
niesr
ft alpha
ifs
the sun
September 29th, 2010 at 7:13 pm
Tom Keene
Chris Whalen
Bill Black
Steve Keen
Yves Smith
September 30th, 2010 at 8:13 am
[...] Who are the dozen most consequential market commentators right now? (TBP) [...]
September 30th, 2010 at 9:49 am
Strictly speaking “Consequential”, being an effect, result, outcome directly connected to Commentator’s presentation:
Meredith Whitney nailing banks right where they lie.
David Tepper talking his hot book.
David Rosenberg seeing beneath the shine
Ken Rogoff
Mohammed El-Erian
Karl Denninger…ONLY on fundamental finance, useless or worse on politics
Zero Hedge
William Black
Harry Markopolis
Matt Taibbi
but only the top two sent the market on a tear.