Ah, for the life of a pundit. You get paid to spout about something you may or may not understand, go home and if you are smart, reap the rewards of the rumors you've created. Evidence: Jim Cramer of MSNBC.
To begin to understand why this guy is one of the best examples of insidious corruption on cable television, you might want to review a rec'd and rescued diary on this site today in which Arendt quotes Charlie Pierce.
Any theory is valid if it sells books, soaks up ratings, or otherwise moves units...Anything can be true if someone says it loudly enough.
And then think about the effect on this nation of statements like this one:
quote
."...according to Cramer: "Until we get the economy moving again, I think everybody wishes that Obama would just kind of go away for a little bit."
There's absolutely no doubt that Jim Cramer represents the evil elite who got us into this economic mess--amoral Wall Street gamers. The public record is as full of incidents in which he's been accused of conflict of interest as it is of Pat Buchanan's bigotry. Here's just one incident from 1995.
This became an issue in 1995, when a front page Washington Post story charged that the Cramer & Co. hedge fund had made $2.5 million as a major stockholder in three thinly traded small companies whose stock soared in value after favorable mention in a SmartMoney column by Cramer. Moreover, Cramer had bought large amounts of shares in these companies after submitting the column to the editors but before the magazine reached readers. As a result of this incident, SmartMoney added disclosures about the stock holdings of its contributors and barred them from writing about stocks in which they held large positions or that were thinly traded.
Here's another incident from 1998.
CNBC temporarily yanked a well-known guest analyst from the network Wednesday after ethics questions arose about whether he was commenting on a stock and attempting to trade it at the same time.
Wall Street money manager James Cramer, who also frequently appears on the Internet and comments in print, was removed from CNBC as the business network investigates comments he made about the stock of Internet company WavePhore Inc. He denied any wrongdoing
And just two months ago, his shenanigans continued as reported in Salon
Jim Cramer offering advice on "Obama-proof" stocks The CNBC host is offering advice for investors who want to avoid getting hurt by "Bolshevik-leaning" Democrats, but are his suggestions any good?
In a often-repeated effort at self-preservation, corporate America creates an "expert" who advises the small ("Main Street") investors of this country that the progressive politicians who are trying to regulate and stimulate us out of this mess are somehow working against him. And as clear evidence of their conspiracy this "pundit" is never even countered by someone who disagrees with him, but rather brought on as an honored guest. Cramer, of course, pulls a three-fer; he gets attention, serves Wall Street, and probably reaps some conflicted profits for a small group of investor friends again.
In a very few corners of what we call "public media" a few months ago there was reported that the execs of CNBC had a private dinner meeting, concerned that Cramer, Kudlow and others on that network had become too overt in their constant attacks on the President too soon, and that they were becoming perceived as the second anti-Obama network. Cramer was urged to cool it a bit--and he did--while they attempted to wound the administration by 1000 cuts for awhile. At first I was amazed they cared, then realized it was just a game of playing for time, stalling any reform proposal until the underpinnings of doubt had been sown.
What amazes me even more is that a progressive community like the one that gathers around this site so often underestimates the vast power of the moneyed interests working against it. In issues like health care and financial regulation, the perfect becomes the enemy of the good.
Let me propose that a lot more of this bandwidth needs to be used reminding the many readers (including tens of thousands of lurkers and moles from other media sources) that we aren't blind, deaf and dumb. We should be using this outlet to discredit people like Jim Cramer by exposing their own history more often. If we're lucky, the word might spread.