Note to NBC's boss: Dude, try watching your own channel sometime
On a day when IBM's reportedly mulling a buyout of Sun Microsystems, Uncle Ben Bernanke decides to print another $300 billion or so, and Congress gets a chance to throw spitballs at the weasels at AIG, there are better things to do than mock NBC's Jeff Zucker as an empty suit.
But after reading the synopsis of Zucker's remarks Wednesday criticizing Jon Stewart for eviscerating the goofs who predominate on CNBC, it's not even fair. How can one resist?
I don't want to prejudice you (just yet) so here's how BusinessWeek reported the story:
Jeff Zucker, the chief executive of NBC Universal, is calling comedian Jon Stewart's attacks on business network CNBC "incredibly unfair." At a media conference Wednesday in New York, Zucker said "The Daily Show" host's recent rips on CNBC, its "Mad Money" host Jim Cramer and business media in general were "completely out of line."
Zucker went on to say that while "everyone wants to find a scapegoat," he defended the home team. The suggestion that the business media or CNBC was responsible for the economic meltdown, he said, was "absurd."
On the yuckster scale, that one is off the charts. I realize that Zucker can't come out in public and say, "Well, the truth is that Jim Cramer is a clueless clown" or that "Dennis Kneale doesn't have enough sense to tie his shoes, let alone offer financial advice." (The truth is that Zucker wouldn't find an awful lot of people jumping ugly if he did. Maybe one day.)
I monitor CNBC each day as part of my job. And after watching the channel's coverage nearly every day since the late 1990s, I can tell you that Zucker is full of malarkey. He claims that CNBC has "distinguished itself" in its coverage of the crisis and the economy over the last two years. Now that's a comedic touch that even Stewart would applaud.
Distinguished? The only personalities at CNBC who don't seem to be smoking the funny stuff before going on air are Mark Haynes, Steve Liesman, and David Faber. That's it. The rest of the forgettable bunch over there take dictation from Wall Street. Did CNBC cause the crash? Of course not. But the track record of empty-headed prognosticating and cynical sniping at anyone daring to take a more critical look at the economy speaks for itself. Until everything came unglued last fall, the economists Robert Shiller, who called the housing bubble, and Nouriel Roubini, who called the stock collapse, often served as pinatas for sundry CNBC cheerleaders trying to pump up the noise.
Stewart, who has had a lot of fun at CNBC's expense the last couple of weeks, obviously struck a nerve with his lampooning. The subject clearly wasn't to Zucker's liking, but the bigger question is why it takes a fake newsman to point out the channel's litany of screw-ups.
Instead of circling the wagons, Zucker and his management team should take a long look at the content CNBC puts out. A public skewering was long overdue, though I'm sure that CNBC will survive (and probably thrive) this episode. Will it improve? One can only hope. Meanwhile, this one is another asterisk in the lengthening bill of particulars against the quality of U.S. journalism. Note to the Zuck-meister: The fact that you don't get what Stewart's talking about is yet one more reason to worry about the future of the mainstream media.
Charles Cooper has covered technology and business for more than 25 years. Before joining CNET News, he worked at the Associated Press, Computer & Software News, Computer Shopper, PC Week, and ZDNet. E-mail Charlie. 
Even I'm impressed. :)
The whole idea is to get something out there and make money off of it. From there, it becomes about squeezing more money out of it and monetizing all the correlaries rather than whatever the product was. So, you get (with TV), not offending sponsors and doing everything possible to please sponsors and getting more money out of sponsors. And how can they supplement the money they get from the sponsors with add-ons.
What about the product, though? Never mind that, money's being made.
In all seriousness though ordaj is right on the money, it's become milking the cash cow rather than producing quality products and nowhere else is this more obvious than in the traditional media industry. I could talk about music companies at this point too, but we all know that to death.
Zucker saying that CNBS didn't cause the financial meltdown is irrelevant. The fact is that they had the knowledge and expertise to know that this was in the making. They may not have had the foresight to understand how bad it would be, but they had a responsibility to report the risks to the public the risks that were being taken with their money. CNBC failed the public. CNBC (among others) failed to report the reality of the situation. Furthermore, it seems that they failed to report the reality of the situation because they had ulterior motives.
I love Jon Stewart. Why the hell is he doing this type of investigating reporting? Because the people that are supposed to be are not doing it. It's not fair to him. I look forward to the day that he can safely retire to fart jokes and other nonsense. I'm sure he does too.
Bravo to Stewart for exposing them with nothing more than the courage to tell the truth.
Zucker jumped the shark a long time ago and has lost whatever touch he might have once had. He's over and he'll be the last guy in the room to figure it out. The cluetrain stopped at his station every day, too bad Jeff never bothered to get on board.
Talk about a pair of quivering mice who have no idea what world they're now living in, it's Zucker and Cramer.
http://therehearsalstudio.blogspot.com/2009/03/in-comedy-begins-responsibilities.html
Stewart is just a clown while Cramer has a grasp of what the market is all about. Most Americans are totally clueless about the market. By the way for every bull on CNBC they have a naysayer at the same time.
To debate the specifics and the mems' Zuckerman is offering up is only propagating his red herrings; you know this-just thought I'd remind you.
I have to give Cramer credit for showing up for that interview. He must have known he was going into a grinder. It's not like Jon is freewheeling, he's got a very sharp staff who provides lots of talking points before he gets started. I wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of that :)
As for Zucker, well he's clearly a crybaby. How he ever made it to CEO is a miracle. Instead of admitting that their 'advise' has been horribly wrong and making a vague promise to do better he's taking genuine offense. Stupid. Now he looks like a fool. It could have been free advertising or he could at least have scored sympathy points.
Zucker: FAIL
We've all been participating in the race to the bottom of credible reporting.
- by DrollTroll March 24, 2009 9:11 PM PDT
- Jon Stewart is basically an opportunist. I'm no fan of Jim Cramer or Wall St or the capitalist system, but it is easy to pick apart a clown like Cramer and the financial reporting industry in hindsight. Stewart asked Cramer rhetorically why he (Cramer) didn't know or realize the exorbitant returns couldn't just keep on going and Cramer replied because it had been going on like that from 1999 to 2007...which I find to be a plausible answer. If Stewart thought this was all illusory and fixed, he himself made no mention of such at any earlier time. He should've put his money where his mouth is like I did. In or around 1999 I made $1000 in AOL in 3 months (on a small investment); I sold, paid capital gains taxes, and felt great because I had made enough. I wasn't greedy and I wasn't fooled that it was something that was going to continue indefinitely. Also, I know markets are manipulated. I invested in the least manipulated or most managed entities--i.e. public utilities which are state regulated. The dividend was good but appreciation was small. However, I felt these were the least manipulable. So, did Stewart buy utilities or recommend such strategies? What would he have done from 1999 to 2007? Run with the herd no doubt. Doctors who just several years were recommending Vitamin E supplements may now be looking pretty foolish. It was the current state of knowledge then and everyone was doing it. Don't praise Stewart for Monday morning quarterbacking.
- Reply to this comment
-
(25 Comments)