Posts filed under “Media”

K&C Tonight

A quick heads up: I was supposed to do K&C Thursday night, but just got tagged for tonite — CNBC at 5:10 – to 5:30.

Also on — President’s Counsel of Economic Advisor Chair Greg Mankiw !

I do not know if our segments will overlap, but it should be interesting . . .


Category: Finance, Media

Chart of the Week: Nasdaq 100 Channel

Category: Finance, Media

Going Critical with Niall Ferguson

Category: Books, Finance, Media

NYTimes on Job Creation: Yes! No! Maybe!


In an apparent bid to completely confuse their readers, the NYTimes today has 3 separate stories on lagging job creation and the economic expansion.

The first one, in the Business section, answers the issue with a resounding No:

“Job growth is likely to remain tepid even as the economy moves ahead, according to a survey of professional forecasters by the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia. Indeed, the bank said yesterday, the economists’ outlook for employment has grown gloomier even as their predictions of economic expansion are becoming more robust.

Economists have been puzzled for months by the sluggishness of the employment market. The new forecast suggests that they have come to terms with the pattern established in this recovery: fast economic growth being driven by even faster expansion in productivity, with businesses meeting demand by squeezing more output from their current employees instead of hiring more workers.”

The second article is decidely more rosy.

Read More

Category: Finance, Media

Chart of the Week: Nasdaq A/D Volume Line

Category: Finance, Media

Saved by Manicurists!

Category: Finance, Media

Chart of the Week: % of Nasdaq issues at 30 day highs

Category: Finance, Media

Media Appearence

Category: Media

Time: Not on the Recording Industry’s Side II

Category: Current Affairs, Film, Finance, Media, Music, Sports, Television

It’s not whether the Medals matter or not


Today’s New York Times has an OpEd titled “The Medals Don’t Matter.” It’s by Jake Tapper, who is a well regarded ABC News Correspondent (formerly of Salon). The article reaches the conclusion that voters do not care about the military service of their Presidential candidates.

To reach this feat of logical deduction, Jake focused primarily on the 1992, 1996 and 2000 Presidential elections (and the 2000 GOP primary), and the Military Service of each candidate.

There are many, many analytical errors in his approach, sample size being the most obvious. But let’s focus instead on a very common logic error which seems to catch most people unaware:

Controlling for a single variable instead of many when analyzing complex systems.

I would be oversimplifying the situation were I to call this error, well, a mere oversimplification. But that’s what lay at the heart of this fallacy: Taking an extremely complex and dynamic issue — who won the Presidency and why — and then boiling it down to a single, and in this small sample, mostly minor issue. The author might as well have based it upon how many letters were in the men’s first and last names.

Presidential victories are the result of a far more nuanced and multi-faceted set of factors. This issue deserves to be examined in far greater depth . . .

Read More

Category: Media, Politics, War/Defense