CNBC's Credit and Fault Swaps

Just like the politicians and the bankers, the financial news media has been playing a game of musical chairs for two decades, and the music just stopped: Every talking head who still has a job is terrified of becoming the face of the new Depression by getting tagged as the glibbest enabler of this deregulatory disaster. And deep down they know they're guilty, just as all the news division haircuts know they cheered as Bush plunged us recklessly into Iraq.

And that's why Jon Stewart's Daily Show critique of CNBC has shot through the Internet like a hamster video, and why it keeps generating sequels, like this from Tuesday morning, which in turn sparked Stewart's reply that night:

These serve as network promos for Jim Cramer's appearance tonight on the Daily Show, but that doesn't mean the underlying arguments aren't terribly serious, especially for CNBC, which turns 20 years old next month and has seen an uptick in its ratings as the markets have tanked. It's serious enough that when I called CNBC Friday to ask why it cancelled an appearance by rantonteur Rick Santelli on the Daily Show, and was told to put my queries in an e-mail, vice-president of PR Brian Steel called me back before I'd finished typing my questions.

"Rick wanted to resume his regular duties as a regular on-air editor reporting from the CMC [Chicago Mercantile Exchange] group, and we made a decision to cancel," Steel said. And though the video of Santelli going off on foreclosed mortgagee "losers" has spurred as much blowback as it created "tea parties," it apparently hasn't put the former derivatives trader in the doghouse. "This is the number-one downloaded video in the history of CNBC.com," said Steel. "We love Rick."

Of course, cable news franchises have ended after a Stewart confrontation before--CNN's Crossfire turned out the lights soon after Stewart told Tucker Carlson and Paul Begala that their "partisan hackery" was "hurting America." And let's face it: The reason a lot of people have been tuning into CNBC lately isn't to pick up stock tips in a disastrous market, but for the same reason folks tune into NASCAR--to watch a multicar collision. CNBC has spent most of its TV life befriending CEOs and pumping a bull market, and it has proved to be none-too-nimble in switching its perspective as the entire global economy has melted down.

To be fair, there are some real reporters who hang their hats at the cable outfit, like David Faber, Dylan Ratigan, and Steve Liesman; Liesman has even valiantly tried using reason against Santelli's bully-boy spewing. But for the most part, CNBC has become the main fountain of Republican counter-blame-points within the larger NBC family, marshalling its minions to hit the airwaves and defend the heedless greed that has crippled international finance.

It's curious that while Santelli started CNBC's little auto-de-fe, the network has quickly substituted Jim Cramer as its face for the defense. Could it be that Santelli's response to White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs asking him by name to "read the president's plan"--Santelli said (on G. Gordon Liddy's radio show, no less) that Gibbs was "threatening" him and made his children "nervous to go to school"--seemed a bit, well, paranoid?

Anyway, Santelli had also admitted to voting for John McCain, so maybe Cramer, who has said he's a Democrat, seemed like a better vessel to carry CNBC's Obamacrit. And in that area, Cramer's no slacker: He has suggested that Obama is a "Bolshevik," a "communist," and is "taking cues from Lenin" on his road toward "rampant wealth destruction." Besides, Cramer did defy the whole modus operandi of his network in October 2008 (after the crash had started on September 15, but before the rest of CNBC was willing to admit it) by telling people, "Whatever money you may need in the next five years, please take it out of the stock market, right now, this week."

But that was before a Huffington Post reader sent in this clip, from 2006, of Cramer dishing to TheStreet.com:

I wanted to find a video of Christopher on The Sopranos talking about his "pump and dump" stock scheme to run alongside that clip, to give it a little ethical context, but Sopranos clips are proprietary. Still, you get the picture. On TheStreet.com you saw Cramer admitting that he had deliberately "fomented" a stock (that is, spread rumors to push down its value) in order to make money for his hedge fund back in the days before he went to work for CNBC. He even admits it's illegal to do so, but he did it anyway, since "the SEC doesn't understand" what insiders do all the time.

Tonight's Daily Show, provided Cramer doesn't pull a Santelli, should be a doozy.

Without question, NBC is the most interesting TV network in the era of American collapse. The broadcast division has bland corporate spokesmen like Brian Williams on the network evening news (though not too bland to open one evening with the Santelli rant as the lead item); on cable, MSNBC has Joe Scarborough in the early morning, trying to make up his mind about just how big a blowhard he really is; Chris Matthews and his old-fashioned shouters in the early evening; liberals Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow at night; and then, over on CNBC, it has all those gremlins in the basement, telling us the only way to stay out of an Obamacrat gulag is to lower capital gains taxes.

NBC is also the owner, of course, of the newly relevant Saturday Night Live, where Tina Fey's Sarah Palin really did have political impact last year, and it's the only net with a sitcom about itself, Fey's 30 Rock (is that Kenneth the Page or Bobby Jindal?).

All these different platforms and personalities interact, appear on one another's shows, occasionally flame each other (remember Chris, Joe, and Keith squabbling over live mics during the campaign, and Tom Brokaw pulling rank to keep their "zoo" from spoiling coverage of the Republican National Convention?). The jostling egos make it seem a bit more politically diverse than it really is, though. Beneath the personalities is a deep laissez-faire corporate-think, which is best expressed by CNBC. We hear a lot about "zombie banks" carrying on like the walking dead, but we also have a zombie media galumphing around, unable to see the way the paradigm has shifted, because their salaries have for so long depended on not seeing anything real at all.

The best thing TV ever does is look at itself, and that's what Jon Stewart is doing with CNBC. Will he show the tape of Cramer endorsing fraud tonight? Is the whole stock market a pump-and-dump racket? Will Stewart drive home the point that CNBC is hurting America?

Comments (11)

1. That's what you get when you elect a president with Alzheimer's, an enabler and a special ed student to the presidency. This new guy may have the intellect to get us out of this, but it may be beyond human intelligence and may require divine intervention. I'm burning votive candles every day and praying to my favorite mother of mothers. I just hope China is patient with our credit card debt.

   Posted by julien38 at 03/12/2009 @ 2:11pm

2. If you think Cramer the clown is bad, you should have heard the crazies; Gasparino, Cabrera and company today, bashing Reich. At least Cramer doesn't pretend to be serious and any one who follows his advise shouldn't be surprised when the get screwed. That is like buying a good used car from Avis.

   Posted by julien38 at 03/12/2009 @ 2:19pm

3. Actually, I'm wondering where James Glassman is lately...

   he of "Dow 36,000" fame!

   LOL

   Posted by Mask at 03/12/2009 @ 2:21pm

4. I wouldn't expect many fireworks tonight at the Daily Show.

   Jon Stewart has a tendency of getting soft in interviews with his guests, even if he was critical of them before (see any of McCain's visits to the show.)

   Maybe he does not want to be an ungracious host, but the result is usually not very interesting.

   Posted by CarloP at 03/12/2009 @ 3:32pm

5. I don't know why Cramer even bothers with Stewart. I realize Cramer is a good Democrat but really, why bother with a nutjob like Stewart.

   I only put in a few moments ever 3-4 months to view his show just to see if he's gained some sanity. But he remains a typical leftwing screwup.

   Cramer and Santelli are great however. And they are reflecting the increasing negative view of economists about Obama.

   "U.S. President Barack Obama and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner received failing grades for their efforts to revive the economy from participants in the latest Wall Street Journal forecasting survey

   The economists' assessment stands in stark contrast with Mr. Obama's popularity with the public, with a recent Wall Street Journal/NBC poll giving him a 60% approval rating. A majority of the 49 economists polled said they were dissatisfied with the administration's economic policies.

   On average, they gave the president a grade of 59 out of 100, and although there was a broad range of marks, 42% of respondents rated Mr. Obama below 60. Mr. Geithner received an average grade of 51. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke scored better, with an average 71

   The economists' negative ratings mark a turnaround in opinion. In December, before Mr. Obama took office, three-quarters of respondents said the incoming administration's economic team was better than the departing Bush team. However, Mr. Geithner's latest marks are lower than the average grade of 57 that former Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson received in January.

   http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123671107124286261.html

   Posted by antisocialist at 03/12/2009 @ 5:07pm

6. Posted by snowball666 at 03/12/2009 @ 5:15pm

   I've commented before and it seems to be a continuing issue for you that you have reading comprehension problems.

   I did not call Santelli and Cramer economists. I said they are REFLECTING the increasing negative view of economists.

   As to who the economists are; not really relevant. I'm sure you had no problem with them when as the article notes, they had very positive views of Obama and his plans late last year.

   So they were right then, but they are merely partisans now? Is that how your logic works?

   Posted by antisocialist at 03/12/2009 @ 5:22pm

7. Fair enough. I misread you. And it's 'increasingly', if you want to play at pedantry.

   Posted by snowball666 at 03/12/2009 @ 5:31pm

   I know. I started to correct it in the followup but felt it better to be consistent.

   Thanks for that acknowledgement.

   Posted by antisocialist at 03/12/2009 @ 5:40pm

8. This is me feigning surprise.

   Yeah. It's relevant which economists, anti.

   Posted by snowball666 at 03/12/2009 @ 5:52pm

   you're still missing the point. Were those same economists being partisan when they said far more positive things last December?

   Also, if you watch the video link in the article, the journalist said that the economists were both Democrat and Republican. If you click another link you can download the list of economists.

   Finally, I don't hear you griping that the same NBC/WSJ polls of the public that give Obama high ratings are bogus.

   Posted by antisocialist at 03/12/2009 @ 6:17pm

9. please... no one who knows anything about investing takes cramer seriously

   stewart is a comedian (whom i enjoy)

   cramer is an entertainer (not one i enjoy too much) who is posing as an investment advisor

   you'd be better off listening to suzy orman

   PS GE will hit double digits tomorrow so invest there

   Posted by philcall at 03/12/2009 @ 8:58pm

10. cramer's a dolt.

    <<<<<>>>>>

    China, the U.S. government's largest creditor, is "worried" about its holdings of Treasuries and wants assurances that the investment is safe, Premier Wen Jiabao said.

    "We have lent a huge amount of money to the United States," Wen said at a press briefing in Beijing today after the annual meeting of the legislature. "Of course we are concerned about the safety of our assets. To be honest, I am a little bit worried. I request the U.S. to maintain its good credit, to honor its promises and to guarantee the safety of China's assets."

    Posted by frosty zoom at 03/13/2009 @ 01:03am

11. Cramer is a crook. He unabashedly admits as much in the TheStreet.com video clip. He thinks this is behavior is ok as long as it makes money for himself and his clients. This is an excellent example of the 'invisible hand' picking our pockets. Guys like Cramer help cause bad things to happen like the current economic collapse!

    Posted by neskier at 03/13/2009 @ 11:22am