Jon Stewart Took Down CNBC and Jim Cramer - Hard Hitting - Awesome - Best

Originally posted by Valhall
I'd like to follow up with something just to give an indicator of how deep this rabbit hole goes on trying to prohibit all us working stiffs from actually realizing profits on our retirement funds.

So latter part of 2006 is when I started pulling...some times every day. I get a letter from the HR administrator in our company. The letter states that the company managing our 401k (I won't name any companies right now) has noticed a significant amount of trades on my 401k and that if they continued they might have to block my ability to make transactions. They went on to say "we do not recommend managing your 401k account based on predictions of market performance"...and I'm not crapping you on that.

Good for you Val. For every person like you though, isn't it sad for all the others who "did what they were told" and let the experts manage their funds. It is so sad for the ones who stayed in for the long-term based on this conspiratorial advice from the MSM and all levels of the investment/hr industry. The rabbit hole, as you said, is deep. It is pathetic to me how obvious the damage left in the wake can be and how the responsibility is assumed or none or far to few. It is pure unadulterated financial servitude via rape, pillage and plunder with systemic collusion. Blah.

Stories like yours refresh the soul. Stories like yours create indignation and clarification of just how guilty so, so many really were and are. I sincerely hope, there is retribution for all those who were held in similar financial chains without the fortitude and knowledge to know they were being lied to and denied their rights.

Peace.



[edit on 14-3-2009 by DancedWithWolves]

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


Agreed.
He gets his cajones nailed to a wall in that video. I'm surprised he didn't get up and walk off the set.

"But you'll never hear me say that on T.V."

"... Well, its on TV now."

That was shocking. Too bad the point is lost on some.

Story about how Cramer's ratings have dropped since Stewart began exposing them:

www.portfolio.com...

Yesterday, I idly wondered whether all the hullabaloo over CNBC and how very wrong and/or out of bounds its commentators have been on some occasions will affect the network's ratings, for good or ill. I put the question to you, my loyal legions, and a pretty decisive 78 percent of you predicted that all the criticism will hurt CNBC's viewership.

And while it's too early to say if that prediction will be borne out -- The Daily Show's initial broadside was only nine days ago -- there is some very preliminary, very ambiguous evidence that perhaps the pummeling has begun to have an impact.

In the first three days of this week, CNBC's Business Day programming block was down 10 percent in the key demographic of adults 25-to-54 versus the same period the week before, and down 11 percent among total viewers. Meanwhile, Mad Money was also down 10 percent in the 25-to-54 demographic, but only 4 percent among all viewers -- suggesting that maybe some of those bored college kids who watch Jon Stewart did, in fact, tune in to find out exactly what is the deal with this Jim Cramer character.

I did hear on CNN that Cramer's viewership has dropped 24% since it all began.

yea what he did was truly amazing. we watched that daily show episode yesterday in economics class

reply to post by FerTheBetter


In High School or College?

Wow, they would show that in a school class?


What did the teacher say about it?

Yeah im surprised that they showed that in school as well. Well to the teacher...S&F for you

reply to post by questioningall

highschool,

second line

reply to post by questioningall


personally i think that my economics teacher knows whats goin on and how messed up the economy and govt. is.

reply to post by FerTheBetter



Isn't it amazing........ that a high school economics teacher would show what is suppose to be a "comedy program" to their students, for them to understand the 'financial world" and the dealings of it!

WOW -

How did the teacher represent the showing?

Was it by the way of......... this is what goes on, so don't trust what you hear?

Or......... this is a "take down"?

What was the teachers spin on it?

Hey, as a little note to this show

Do a google search of : Cramer on Daily Show............

you know what you will get?

14,800,000 returns!!!!


Search another way: Cramer on Jon Stewart..................
results:

Results 1 - 10 of about 1,540,000 for cramer on jon stewart. (0.13 seconds)

That is HOW BIG IT IS

No way can Cramer last much longer at CNBC........... nor how their programing is!!!



[edit on 14-3-2009 by questioningall]

reply to post by questioningall


he presented it more like the take down, he talked a little bit of how more of this needs to happen to make people realize that the "big news channels" arent always telling you whats really happening

i was really glad that he showed it to us, and is trying to get the next generation of adults to realize what is really going on

[edit on 14-3-2009 by FerTheBetter]

Originally posted by Jay-in-AR
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

 

Agreed.
He gets his cajones nailed to a wall in that video. I'm surprised he didn't get up and walk off the set.

"But you'll never hear me say that on T.V."

"... Well, its on TV now."

That was shocking. Too bad the point is lost on some.

I see you're enjoying your bread and circuses quite nicely.

reply to post by FlyersFan


JS is a business man. He is a comedic business man. He will go after anyone who is gonna give him fodder.

The GOP has just been giving him quite a bit of fodder.
And I just think conservatives are very very sensitive to this fact right now and can't handle it.

We have to hear all the blubber from the likes Rush and Hannity. Yet there is an anchor who shows their ridiculousness and he is bipartisan.

When FOX actually starts being fair for a change, then you have an arguement.

reply to post by questioningall


This kind of upsets me too. Can someone from Canada or in the UK explain this please?

Originally posted by sos37
I have to agree with this as well. Seriously, if you're relying on a television show and only that show to tell you what to do with your money - then you DO deserve to lose it.

So who is saying that they relied on only one show? Perhaps they watched all of them and thus got the same bad advice from everyone? Why would many or any people believe that the financial news media are all in it together to fool people into investing in this global pyramid scheme? If your a investor what makes you sooooooo much better than the rest for knowing that the pyramid scheme was going to come down this time instead of on all earlier warnings?

Of course it makes sense that teenagers would see it on television and think it's a great idea, or read about it on the internet and think it's the right thing to do. Everything on the tubes must be right.

Well i don't think anyone is THAT stupid but again i feel compelled to ask why you think most people would presume that their ALL lying as part of on vast conspiracy to defraud investors?

If you're really serious about making money using a TV show, what you SHOULD be doing with shows like Cramer's is considering the advice, maybe taking notes, and THEN going and talking to a certified financial advisor at a reputable company and asking that person what they think about what you watched.

So your advising that we trust stock brokers who work as agents for one investment group of another instead of the those on Tv shows? Can you explain the difference? You don't think Cramer and those fellows were 'highly regarded' in their communities?

Heck, talk to a few financial advisors and get a consensus.

The only consensus you will get is that you should invest , somehow; how else are they going to get your money into their pockets? I mean what advice they can give you is worse than that?

It's your money, after all. If you want to throw it away on a whim then you might as well be buying lotto tickets.

Lotto owners don't get bailed out when their dogs eats their winning tickets which is basically what the financial industry is claiming when they suggest that it was the sub-prime lending that got them into liquidity trouble.

It's just fascinating that it's always the little guys fault according to the people who are doing their best to defraud the little guy who is commonly too busy WORKING for a living to figure out that his being scammed.

Stellar

Originally posted by redhatty
Yes the interview was hard-hitting and excellently done.

It is almost a sad indication of where we are when a Comedy Channel show (entertainment) is giving us the REAL NEWS while CNBC (News) is giving us "entertainment" programming.

Calling the entire network out (CNBC) and saying that it should have been them doing the investigating and finding the truth was the best part of it.

While most people know that Cramer is a shill/tool, many people view CNBC as a financial news network, and expect more from them than they have been receiving.

Yes. You bring up some very good points. I believe that "The Daily Show" works as a gatekeeper of dissent. They do not touch any real issues, staying within the lines of safe issues and rhetoric. Bill Maher is another good example. It gives disenfranchised people somewhat of an outlet by infusing harmless comedy with pretended dissent. The fact that CNN gave it coverage and said that he "won" is proof enough for me that this is the case. The daily show is fluff of no real import of consequence, like it was created to be.

[edit on 02/21/09 by daeoeste]

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by questioningall

 

This kind of upsets me too. Can someone from Canada or in the UK explain this please?

I'm in Canada and have no problems getting the daily show website - I have noticed, however, that I cannot get some websites, like free USA audio/radio shows - when I try, they want a "zip code" and if you don't have one, you don't get the show. So while Daily Show is easy access to us, I absolutely believe censorship/control is coming day by day by little 'restrictions' like the one I described - hope this helps clarify the question

Very Interesting and serious piece wrote about the show, on "The Nation"

link: www.thenation.com...

Cramer had been on convicted inside-trader Martha Stewart's show earlier that day, admitting to a vague sense of guilt and confessing his fear of the beating he would get from his "idol" Jon Stewart. In all his on-air appearances (at least, all those after Huffington Post put up theStreet.com tape of Cramer recommending spreading false rumors to make quick money, which Stewart ran again and again), Cramer had so thoroughly pre-atoned that he'd instantly agree with Stewart's every criticism even before he finished a thought. Stewart was saying something about "treating people like adults," as Cramer blurted, "HowaboutItry? I'lltrythat! Icandothat!"

In fact, he was so quick with his prostration that it seemed clear Cramer didn't really understand Stewart's argument at all, which wasn't about whether he or CNBC was right or wrong on this or that stock tip, but that the network's entire ethos made it part of the massive fraud that Wall Street has been engineering for the past decade or more. Stewart's was that oldest common sense argument: There's no such thing as a free lunch, and wealth you don't have to work for eventually goes poof. "There's a market for it and we give it to them," Cramer protested, showing, again, that he didn't get it. "There's a market for coc aine and hookers too!" Stewart replied.

Stewart is often praised, and rightly so, for doing what reporters should be doing--James Fallows just wrote that he's become Edward R. Murrow--but his rise as a tribune of the people has less to do with his own virtues than it does with the remarkable failure of American journalism under George W. Bush. Stewart is not a reporter, nor a financial expert. He's merely unconstrained by cozy access arrangements and corporate media shibboleths, free to call a war lost or an economy rigged--or a TV network hopelessly full of hype and bombast--based on what's right in front of his own eyes.

His interview with Cramer was so white-knuckled and full-bore that this morning even Cramer's buddies, like the head-in-the-sand crew over at Morning Joe, said nary a word about it, firmly averting their eyes from their colleague's nakedness.

Here he wonders is NBC would mention it anywhere......... surprise, surprise - no one did

Will Brian Williams make the Cramer vs. Stewart bout the lead item on NBC Nightly News tonight as he did Santelli's rant? There are a lot more folks in the media and on Wall Street who need a televised defenestration like this.

UPDATE: As to whether NBC news would lead with the Stewart/Cramer bout, the answer is no. Ann Curry, who subbed for Brian Williams Friday night, didn't mention it. Nor did Chris Matthews or Keith Olbermann on MSNBC (even though Keith had previously made Rick Santelli one of his Worst Persons). If an item from TV Newser is right, the loud silence from the extended NBC "family" was no accident: "A TVNewser tipster tells us MSNBC producers were asked not to incorporate the Jim Cramer/Jon Stewart interview into their shows today."

Still, I was hoping against hope that freer-thinker Rachel Maddow would buck any such corporate edict from on high. And buck she did! She gave the story a couple of minutes, describing it in fairly neutral tones, ending on the lament that just when we really need a tough financial watchdog press--implying that CNBC ain't it--the Washington Post announced it's eliminating its stand-alone business section.

We all know a cable network that could use some solid business reporters...

I don't know if this has been covered in other threads but just in case you didn't know Jon Stewart's brother is a officer on the NYSE. He has previous experience as a hedge fund manager(read equities and speculation)

Wall Street Journal:

That’s right. In prepping for tonight’s showdown, Stewart is likely ignoring his comedy writers and instead seeking counsel from his brother Larry Leibowitz, the head of U.S. Markets and Global Technology at NYSE Euronext.

The 48-year-old Leibowitz is something of a Wall Street journeyman. He joined the NYSE from UBS, where he served as chief operating officer of the equity business in the U.S. Prior to that he co-ran Schwab’s capital markets business. Before that, Leibowitz co-founded a quantitative hedge fund called Bunker Capital, served as CEO of REDIbook and headed up quant trading at CSFB.

Who is Jon Stewart's Brother ?

of course this does not mean anything other then it may explain why Stewart is blaming a TV talk show host for the the current economy.

That is like blaming the Iraq war on Bill Oreilly . Stewart is part of the false rebellion that further confuses the innocent and gullible

Wall Street is a confidence game. Look how the money media is extolling the 3 day market rally on the heels of Citigroup's positive numbers...this is just to "con" investor into the market for another looting in 90 days(July?)

I think it was a cheap shot. Jon had the ability to go back and look at ever Cramer show and pick and choose anything that he saw as bait to use.

This is a world recession that Cramer did nothing to cause. Cramer like every Economist/investment firm/stock broker in the world didn’t see this coming. Cramer was a stock broker and his show is based on that style of investment. That style is to analyze past performances and to see how a company’s product will flow into future performances. That’s about it….If a company has had good past performances and has a needed product then buy. I don’t think Cramer or anyone else took into account that the housing market was going to flop, or banks fail, or corrupt companies…

From the look on Cramer’s face it was a very different interview than what he thought it would be, and so Jon basically blindsided him. I would be more impressed if Jon had the CEOs of the big 3 auto makers on and did that type of interview since Cramer was just an easy target as TV personality…

It was proved years ago that Cramer's track record was average at best, so if anyone lost money because of him then they never did their homework and deserved what they got.

To try and pick a short term successful company to make money is really a form of gambling. Picking companies for the long term is investments. I know people who invest many hours of research to pick their horses at the track, and people should understand that Cramer is just a professional horse picker. There are also two sides to this coin, and everyone focuses on just the one of how many winners did he pick. The other side is how many losers he called as a loser and stopped people from buying into a losing company.

Jon Stewart is weak, and went after the easy meat....hmmm who is next?Barny Frank...I think not...