Saturday, March 14, 2009


If there's one good reason for forking out the extra money for a faster internet connection, its so that I can see Jon's face again.

Daily Show's Jon Stewart Rips Into CNBC

Full, unedited clip here.

Jon took Mad Money's Jim Cramer to task for being, well, a shitty journalist. Since I can't stream the video, I made do with the transcript, which is just as spectacular.

STEWART: But isn't that part of the problem? Selling this idea that you don't have to do anything. Any time you sell people the idea that, sit back and you'll get 10 to 20 percent on your money, don't you always know that that's going to be a lie? When are we going to realize in this country that our wealth is work. That we're workers and by selling this idea that of, "Hey man, I'll teach you how to be rich." How is that any different than an infomercial?

CRAMER: Well, I think that your goal should always be to try to expose the fact that there is no easy money. I wish I had found Madoff...

STEWART: But there are literally shows called Fast Money.

CRAMER: I think that people... [Audience laughs] There's a market for it and you give it to them.

STEWART: There's a market for cocaine and hookers. What is the responsibility of the people who cover Wall Street? Who are you responsible to? The people with the 401ks and the pensions and the general public, or the Wall Street traders, and by the way this casts an aspersion on all of Wall Street when I know that's unfair as well. The majority of those guys are working their asses off. They're really bright guys. I know a lot of them. They're just trying to do the right thing and they're getting f--ed in the ass, too.


Whenever it feels as if the world's going to shit, and that there's no hope for the human race -- its good to know there are people like him around.

But Daniel Sinker at the Huffington Post makes a good point about the media coverage of the "showdown" -- the fact that American news outlets covered the spectacle of the interview, and not the point of the interview itself.

I also hope that some of the folks at the excellent Bangladeshi political blogs take a close look at the NY Times article summarizing Hasina's position post-mutiny. Some of the "facts" mentioned seemed dubious, but I lack the confidence and knowledge to make any claims. If my suspicions are correct, it wouldn't be the first time international newspapers get a little careless when they do reports on more "obscure" world events.

(Please don't tell me I should just be glad that the NYT covered it at all.)

Case in point: AP's coverage of yesterday's fire at Bashundhara City, contained a mistake in the very first sentence of the article which states: "A helicopter plucked survivors from the roof of Bangladesh's biggest shopping mall Friday..."

Now, unless my own eyes deceived me when I was watching the helicopter load ONE person from the roof, this reporter is being slightly careless with the use of plurals.