Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
It's no wonder - you have Steve "Fed Muppet" Leisman trying to spin every last thing as a positive (he's never met a government statistic he didn't like), Sorkin - who is probably a nice guy and a I think his book was a really terrific read - is not right for TV and lets not forget Phil "Car Leisman" Lebeau, who is the biggest shill the auto industry has going for it.
The best thing about CNBC lately - I haven't watched in a couple of months - is Joe Kernan. Not at all because of the way right-wing attitude (the bits where he brought his daughter - who made Michael J. Fox's Alex P. Keaton character look like a hippie in comparison - should go in the awkward TV hall of fame), but because you can tell that he's maybe getting tired of it and has turned bitter. He's gone from subtle digs at Sorkin to moments that are amusingly awkward TV, especially because Sorkin's comebacks consist largely of staring and blinking. There's no "give and take" - Sorkin just awkwardly chuckles and stares as Kernan gets in one goof after another. It's not informative in the slightest, but it's great awkward TV.
Caruso-Cabrera is annoying, Bartiromo is way annoying, the British guy went from an introduction on Fast Money where he practically had a "Network"-level moment at the traders to being another irritating "Yes Man" anchor. Becky Quick is fine, but I'm thinking Bloomberg has a better group of women at this point (aside from Betty Liu)
Cramer is, well, Cramer. Cramer in the morning, or "Serious Cramer", is way more informative than "Mad Money" Cramer. Maybe that's just me. I'm not getting the "right wing"-ness of CNBC, either - aside from Kernan and Santelli and Caruso-Cabrera, the entire thing seems quite left-leaning to me. Kudlow too, although Kudlow is getting to that point where he's kind of like that uncle that you nod at family gatherings because you want to be polite.
A few other notes - they should have never let Dylan Ratigan and Jeff Macke leave. Ratigan - who is *quality* (and that's what CNBC is missing, largely) could have really been the centerpiece of the network and probably should have been. Whatever happened to Beaker? (Dennis Kneale, and those who have seen the Muppets will get the reference.)
Additionally, and this is probably just me - CNBC has seemingly drifted further and further into political interviews. That's fine, to some degree, as politics certainly has an influence. However, there's mornings in recent months where it seemed more politics than economics. Bloomberg is largely all finance.
Additionally, the Bloomberg app offers live Bloomberg, which is a nice touch.
The extreme right-wing political diatribes by Joe Kernan, Michelle Caruso-Cabrera and Rick Santelli, the constant breathless stock-market cheerleading, and the attitude that corporate American can do no wrong and should be permitted to wreak havoc unfettered by reasonable Federal regulation have all combined to make CNBC a clone of Fox News. Why listen to this when there are reasonable alternatives such as Bloomberg?
Reply to @DlphcOracl: "...the constant breathless stock-market cheerleading, and the attitude that corporate American can do no wrong and should be permitted to wreak havoc unfettered by reasonable Federal regulation "
CNBC lost it's mojo years ago - except for Fox, they have *the* most annoying bunch of on-camera "personalities" (I use the term loosely) of any network, financial or otherwise... including Joe Kernan (sorry Scott). Their collective & chronic propensity for constantly butting in and cutting their guests off in mid-comment/sentence drove me away quite a while ago - I have occasionally checked in lately/briefly and if anything the butting in/cutting off behavior is far worse than it ever was if that is possible and apparently it is, esp. with Kernan.
Bloomberg has some types that do this, too, like professional buttinskis Tom Keene and Stephanie Ruhle - but it is not nearly as prevalent as on CNBC. Bloomberg is generally far more watchable and has been for some time.
As an aside, what the heck ever happened to the art of interviewing, as in letting your guests finish/complete their thoughts & comments, putting your own inflated media ego aside in the name of actually informing your viewers? Sheeeesh!!
I seldom watch CNBC, and never watch Fox Business. Remember that it's all about selling advertising. Any calm, rational discussion of investing would be too boring, would not attract viewers, and advertising dollars would bolt. Bloomberg is certainly better, but I recall during the 2010 flash crash, that in response to an anchor's questions of what investors should do, their man on the floor of the exchange screamed "You gotta sell everything!" So much for any semblance of rationality. I have Bloomberg, MarketWatch, and CNNMoney open all day during the week, but I rarely opt to listen to any live discussion for the above reasons. And we tell our clients to turn off these channels. Some actually listen to us.
Reply to @deckard: No, no - I don't think Kernan is a good anchor or that he's informative or anything. It's more a matter of watching someone who has probably grown tired of it and his banter with Sorkin went from light goofing to increasingly more bitter. It's not informative, but it's fantastic awkward television. You think Kernan is right wing, his daughter seemed twice as right wing when she was on CNBC shilling for their book.
However, the best moment ever is Sorkin's horrifically awkward interview on the trading floor with Buffett, who looked all sorts of pissed off at him.
Again, some highlights from one of the great moments in CNBC history:
Reply to @scott: Santelli and Kernan's political antics and frequent ranting is personally most irritating to me. I do not watch Kudlow as his show is during my work time and it is really not much geared towards investing to begin with anyway.
I liked Mark Haines and Erin Burnett but Mark has passed away and Erin has left for CNN and morning is not the same and they forced Dylan to leave abruptly.
I agree, I like CNBC Europe/Asia much more useful as well as Bloomberg nowadays.
Reply to @BobC: I think their ratings from the above links is showing that their assumption that "rational discussion of investing would not attract viewers" is wrong as they are not doing well right now.
I agree with you on Erin Burnett and I liked her pairing with late Mark Haines. I can't blame her jumping to CNN as she saw the writing on the board.
However, considering Kudlov a socialist is a stretch. He is a typical corrupt capitalist these days. Sander's was mockingly accusing Kudlow of socialist because he becomes all pro government doing something only when his rich buddies are in trouble.
Unless you are trading the "hot stock of the day" and need to know why it is going up or down before the market close watching cnbc is not a good use of your time (possible exception the first 5 minutes of the 9am cnbc show which can inform you about events after the previous day close) Much more valuable is the nightly business report http://video.pbs.org/program/nbr/ because it tells you what is happening in a half hour (actually bout 26 minutes) with very little wasted time
Spot on discussion. I quit watching Kudlow years ago and can no longer stand Kernan in the morning. I think he's sucking up to Ruppert. I watch Bloomberg for business news and even then I can still remember Gary Smith saying that he never turned up the volume but just watched the tape. The talking heads are always speaking from position, etc.
CNBC has a lot of issues. CNBC, unlike Bloomberg, is too political. The only issue that I have with Bloomberg is that they do not have a tape and they show the two day chart instead of quotes at the bottom of the screen. I don't have as big an issue with Betty Liu as some posters do, but find her a bit bland.
CNBC got rid of a lot of their better reporters. When they get rid of someone, they pretend like they never existed. CNBC is a bit of a modeling show focusing in on hot looking female reporters who have credentials but aren't necessary the best available.
Dick Santilli is a joke. He isn't even creditable. He is an embarrassment to CNBC. Maria got bitter over the last 20 years plus. Trish was great but they dumped her. Kelly is just dumb and started out with a chip on her shoulder about Melissa Lee for some reason and then they made her mellow out. When Mark died they snuffed Erin and she left. My two favorites are Steve and David. Kramer is a bit much. I liked him better before Gene Hackman trained him to be more animated.
Another bitter biased commentator is Joe. He got passed over and they threw him on a show that is not even seen by the entire West Coast. He is a bit better than Dick Santilli.
If I were Dick, and thank the Universe I'm not, I would not be proud to have started a political party who worships Sara Palin, Michelle Bachman, and Rand Paul. It goes to creditability. Speaking of bad jokes, when did Joe become the anchor and Becky not? He must of threatened to go to Fox. I'd pack his bags for Joe.
CNBC is nor more of a news channel than Fox News. Bloomberg needs to tweak it's "background screen". I would switch in a NY minute. But they haven't. So I'm stuck with CNBC.
I guess I'm the only one who finds Kernen increasingly amusing - maybe it's because I don't care about politics so much. Here's some who's so clearly gotten bored to the point where just says whatever comes to mind, which is mostly one-liners towards Sorkin every morning (which have only gotten worse), with Becky in the middle rolling her eyes looking like, "Not again." It's a mess, but it's a mess to the point where I find it amusing. CNBC has gotten much worse - and they don't seem to realize it. Josh Brown is the best thing the channel has in terms of on-air personalities. CNBC's "The Profit" is actually a really good show at night, but who knows how many people watch it.
In the 90s when CNBC was born, we boomers were only 10 years away from retirement and beginning to take serious note of the savings (401K and the like) accumulated over decades of employment. Markets seemed to be going straight up. Umployment was low and there were still many high paying union jobs, so that many had money to invest. Those factors helped propel financial news to its peak.
The boomers are mostly retired now and probably a lot smarter about money than 20 years ago. For many, stability has replaced growth as the main objective. Woes of CNBC might be summed up in a line from Fitzgerald's Gatsby, "You can't repeat the past..."
All that said, I agree that the state of network and cable news/public affairs programming is deplorable. Rotten. Stinks to high heaven. And would have put Joe Kernan out to pasture years ago.
Comments
The best thing about CNBC lately - I haven't watched in a couple of months - is Joe Kernan. Not at all because of the way right-wing attitude (the bits where he brought his daughter - who made Michael J. Fox's Alex P. Keaton character look like a hippie in comparison - should go in the awkward TV hall of fame), but because you can tell that he's maybe getting tired of it and has turned bitter. He's gone from subtle digs at Sorkin to moments that are amusingly awkward TV, especially because Sorkin's comebacks consist largely of staring and blinking. There's no "give and take" - Sorkin just awkwardly chuckles and stares as Kernan gets in one goof after another. It's not informative in the slightest, but it's great awkward TV.
Caruso-Cabrera is annoying, Bartiromo is way annoying, the British guy went from an introduction on Fast Money where he practically had a "Network"-level moment at the traders to being another irritating "Yes Man" anchor. Becky Quick is fine, but I'm thinking Bloomberg has a better group of women at this point (aside from Betty Liu)
Cramer is, well, Cramer. Cramer in the morning, or "Serious Cramer", is way more informative than "Mad Money" Cramer. Maybe that's just me. I'm not getting the "right wing"-ness of CNBC, either - aside from Kernan and Santelli and Caruso-Cabrera, the entire thing seems quite left-leaning to me. Kudlow too, although Kudlow is getting to that point where he's kind of like that uncle that you nod at family gatherings because you want to be polite.
A few other notes - they should have never let Dylan Ratigan and Jeff Macke leave. Ratigan - who is *quality* (and that's what CNBC is missing, largely) could have really been the centerpiece of the network and probably should have been. Whatever happened to Beaker? (Dennis Kneale, and those who have seen the Muppets will get the reference.)
Additionally, and this is probably just me - CNBC has seemingly drifted further and further into political interviews. That's fine, to some degree, as politics certainly has an influence. However, there's mornings in recent months where it seemed more politics than economics. Bloomberg is largely all finance.
Additionally, the Bloomberg app offers live Bloomberg, which is a nice touch.
Well put.
Bloomberg has some types that do this, too, like professional buttinskis Tom Keene and Stephanie Ruhle - but it is not nearly as prevalent as on CNBC. Bloomberg is generally far more watchable and has been for some time.
As an aside, what the heck ever happened to the art of interviewing, as in letting your guests finish/complete their thoughts & comments, putting your own inflated media ego aside in the name of actually informing your viewers? Sheeeesh!!
However, the best moment ever is Sorkin's horrifically awkward interview on the trading floor with Buffett, who looked all sorts of pissed off at him.
Again, some highlights from one of the great moments in CNBC history:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/44730157/
"HOBBS: So Andrew, has he invited you to the dinner tonight?
ANDREW: I have not been invited. Warren has not invited me. Am I invited to the dinner tonight?
BUFFETT: No. (my note: this was not a "joking" no.)
ANDREW: I don't know how much that plate costs, though. That's a pricey plate.
BUFFETT: Let's— get out your wallet.
ANDREW: Yeah, I've got to get my wallet out, so. Anyway, back to you guys. (my note: at this point, Sorkin looks like he's about to crap himself.)
BUFFETT: We're very selective. (my note: what a statement from old "man of the people" Uncle Warren.)
HOBBS: Wow.
TAMRAZ: Oh.
BUFFETT: All you have to have is $1,000 or...(unintelligible)."
________
"You Own Some Investments?" "We Own Some Investments."
=
"ANDREW: You own some German bonds?
BUFFETT: We own German bonds.
ANDREW: German bonds.
BUFFETT: Yeah."
I liked Mark Haines and Erin Burnett but Mark has passed away and Erin has left for CNN and morning is not the same and they forced Dylan to leave abruptly.
I agree, I like CNBC Europe/Asia much more useful as well as Bloomberg nowadays.
I agree with you on Erin Burnett and I liked her pairing with late Mark Haines. I can't blame her jumping to CNN as she saw the writing on the board.
However, considering Kudlov a socialist is a stretch. He is a typical corrupt capitalist these days. Sander's was mockingly accusing Kudlow of socialist because he becomes all pro government doing something only when his rich buddies are in trouble.
Spot on discussion. I quit watching Kudlow years ago and can no longer stand Kernan in the morning. I think he's sucking up to Ruppert. I watch Bloomberg for business news and even then I can still remember Gary Smith saying that he never turned up the volume but just watched the tape. The talking heads are always speaking from position, etc.
peace,
rono
CNBC got rid of a lot of their better reporters. When they get rid of someone, they pretend like they never existed. CNBC is a bit of a modeling show focusing in on hot looking female reporters who have credentials but aren't necessary the best available.
Dick Santilli is a joke. He isn't even creditable. He is an embarrassment to CNBC. Maria got bitter over the last 20 years plus. Trish was great but they dumped her. Kelly is just dumb and started out with a chip on her shoulder about Melissa Lee for some reason and then they made her mellow out. When Mark died they snuffed Erin and she left. My two favorites are Steve and David. Kramer is a bit much. I liked him better before Gene Hackman trained him to be more animated.
Another bitter biased commentator is Joe. He got passed over and they threw him on a show that is not even seen by the entire West Coast. He is a bit better than Dick Santilli.
If I were Dick, and thank the Universe I'm not, I would not be proud to have started a political party who worships Sara Palin, Michelle Bachman, and Rand Paul. It goes to creditability. Speaking of bad jokes, when did Joe become the anchor and Becky not? He must of threatened to go to Fox. I'd pack his bags for Joe.
CNBC is nor more of a news channel than Fox News. Bloomberg needs to tweak it's "background screen". I would switch in a NY minute. But they haven't. So I'm stuck with CNBC.
The boomers are mostly retired now and probably a lot smarter about money than 20 years ago. For many, stability has replaced growth as the main objective. Woes of CNBC might be summed up in a line from Fitzgerald's Gatsby, "You can't repeat the past..."
All that said, I agree that the state of network and cable news/public affairs programming is deplorable. Rotten. Stinks to high heaven. And would have put Joe Kernan out to pasture years ago.