When in doubt blame conservatism, even when it comes to the struggles of a media outlet - and ignore the possibility that liberalism might be to blame.
Ever since Nielsen came out with the July numbers for CNBC that showed the network had suffered a 28 percent ratings decline over a year ago, some of the financial media intelligentsia have been eager to point to what they perceive are the right-leaning political shortcomings of the network as a possible reason.
According to Daniel Gross, the Moneybox columnist for Slate.com and a columnist for Newsweek (and a known proprietor of "teabag" double entendres), there's been a decline in interest in financial news since the markets haven't been as volatile. But Gross is also convinced there's a component of the network's "rightward, anti-Obama tilt," despite its efforts to placate the left.
"But while many anchors and reporters play it straight down the middle, CNBC has embraced a surprisingly politicized view of these developments," Gross wrote in his Aug. 4 Slate "Moneybox" column. "Many of the network's most prominent personalities are quite far to the right. (Disclosure: I appear on CNBC occasionally, and the network's on-air and off-air staff has been kind to me.) As the stock market fell in January and February, a reaction to the sharp plunge in the global economy and failure of the world's credit system, CNBC hosts and analysts warned of an Obama bear market."
Jonathan Berr, writing for AOL's DailyFinance.com suggests CNBC's rating took a dive after the Jim Cramer/Jon Stewart feud, where the CNBC "Mad Money" turned up lame in a Comedy Central "Daily Show" appearance in March.
"Nonetheless, some observers argue that viewers are tuning out CNBC because they don't like what the[y] are seeing," Kerr wrote on Aug. 4. "This became particularly clear earlier this year, when CNBC's ratings dropped after its slap-fight with the "Daily Show's" Jon Stewart."
But, the shift of CNBC has been anything but more to the right. The Cramer/Stewart feud followed Cramer's outspoken criticism of President Barack Obama's economic policies, and CNBC CME floor reporter Rick Santelli's famous outburst about the Obama's administration's mortgage policies. Since then, the network has gone out of its way to appease elements on the left and its ratings have dropped during that period.
Liberal storefronts have set up shop to influence editorial policy of CNBC (albeit without the same fervor they did three months ago). The network has hired former DNC chair and Vermont Gov. Howard Dean as a contributor and brought in Huffington Post liberal co-founder Arianna Huffington as a guest host on multiple occasions.
And according to the April 16 New York Post's gossip page "Page Six," CNBC brass had even instructed by General Electric CEO Jeffrey Immelt and NBC Universal President Jeff Zucker to back off some of the anti-Obama rhetoric come from the likes of Cramer and Santelli.
But, it was from that point forward that CNBC had seen its ratings show a real decline. The Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) had already begun to come off its lows when CNBC began making these shifts in editorial direction to appease certain left-wing constituencies.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Yeah, that conservative
August 5, 2009 - 18:11 ET by Chris NormanYeah, that "conservative thing" must explain the steep decline in the ratings at Fox News too.
Can some one say FOX BUSINESS CHANNEL?
The "Mainstream" Media: By liberals. For liberals.
Chris... Simple as
August 5, 2009 - 18:15 ET by bigtimerChris...
Simple as that.
..and of course intimidation from Immelt.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
BT,
August 5, 2009 - 18:23 ET by UpNorthI'd suggest sending your sig line to Immelt, but I think the irony would be lost, and I also want him to fail.
UN... So do
August 5, 2009 - 18:31 ET by bigtimerUN...
So do I....regarding the leftist newtworks as Andrew would say...Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
They never listen.
Agenda more important.
Evidently stockholders are happy.
bt, I know I'd probably
August 5, 2009 - 18:18 ET by Chris Normanbt,
I know I'd probably be watching Fox Business in the morning if Comcast would just put it on here.
The "Mainstream" Media: By liberals. For liberals.
Chris,
August 5, 2009 - 18:23 ET by UpNorthI have the same problem with Dish, they carry all kinds of CNN, PMSNBC and the rest of that trash, but you have to upgrade to another package to get FBC.
Yeah, I feel like I'm in an
August 5, 2009 - 18:28 ET by Chris NormanYeah, I feel like I'm in an airport sometimes - you know, when you can't get a seat at a gate far enough away not to hear CNN? You move far enough away from one monitor and the monitor at the next gate gets you.
The "Mainstream" Media: By liberals. For liberals.
UN... I'm glad to know
August 5, 2009 - 18:28 ET by bigtimerUN...
I'm glad to know that....we are moving not far from here soon, and I was thinking about switching...I think I'll just stay where we are regarding satellite service.
I'm just going to be glad to put it in another area, more open area where trees are cleared out of the way.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
BTW, Chris,
August 6, 2009 - 01:30 ET by sic721If you don't have it, demand it! heh heh heh, had to throw that in.
I do not understnd how anyone in their right mind, with the left-slanted, biased 'reporting' on msnbc and cnn, could take cnbc or cnn money seriously. I believe that's the reason their ratings are tanking, the parent networks are dragging them down with them. If you can't trust what you hear on msnbc and cnn, why in the world would you trust either of their business channels?
RACIST-\rac·ist\(rā'sĭzt')-A person winning an argument with a leftist.
What a joke!!
August 5, 2009 - 18:23 ET by wbones8765SRM representative who is left of Chavez says his reporters are right leaning!!!
EIB
August 5, 2009 - 18:53 ET by UnsaneIf CNBC wants their ratings to go up, get rid of clowns like Screamin' Dean.
And someone please get Erin Isabelle Burnett to wear a skirt more often than twice a year. And on those rare occasions when she DOES wear a skirt, get her to appear on camera wearing it, without obstructions.
:-)
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
CNBC's problem?
August 5, 2009 - 19:09 ET by FlatlinerTheir problem is that they have "NBC" in their name. Over the years, NBC News squandered whatever credibility they had. Every year it has gotten worse.
Why would anyone who wants factual information tune into a channel that has a proven track record of spinning what they report to advance their own political agenda?
The actual real reason
August 5, 2009 - 20:02 ET by Kingfish17My guess is that CNBC rating went up quite a bit starting last summer, and lasting through this spring, because of the market meltdown. Their rating have to start dropping because the stock market, thank goodness, no longer appears to be going to zero. If Obama's policies and popularity experience a surge, then the stock market will get clobbered again and ratings at CNBC should go back up.
But why would anyone want to watch CNBC? Most of the time the regulars and guests are talking about things that are pretty esoteric. It's a niche channel for people interested in what's going on in the business world, which of course does involve politics to some degree, but not entirely. So unless someone wants to follow the markets and business, they are not going to watch CNBC.
There is virtually no "human interest" stories. Michael Jackson is dead? Sure they mentioned it, but then they move on. And that's why I watch it. I've said this before, if the rest of the MSM was as balanced as CNBC we would have a different person in the oval office.
And FOX business? I wish it was better, but it's not. It's not even really close. The guests are not as knowledgable about what's going on. And most of the hosts are clueless. I don't like it that CNBC has started to have regular guests slots for some crazy left loons who know nothing about business and even less about the stock market, but there's always the mute button.
The bulk of the conservatives on CNBC are indeed "country club Rockefeller" conservatives. But at least they believe in free markets and a laise faire government. And most of the Dem leaning regulars are middle of the road types who don't support Obama's policies. It's not perfect, I wish FOX Business was better. CNBC is about as middle of the road as we are ever going to see on the MSM.
"I've sentenced boys younger then you to the gas chamber. Didn't want to do it, but I felt I owed it to them." Judge Smails
I agree with your
August 6, 2009 - 15:43 ET by jdhawkI agree with your comments. I have CNBC on all day long. It is a necessary evil of my work. Nevertheless, it is quite often on mute.
There is no doubt that CNBC's commentators have been told to tone down the rehetoric against the administration. This is especially true when it comes to the economy in general and health care in particular. (What Dean and Huff n' Puff are doing on the network is beyond me. Since when did they know anything about anything?)
For example, Carberra (sp?), this afternoon, interviewed some numb nuts that works for bambi, the first stupid liberal, about the state of the economy. Carberra has been fiesty in the past to almost anyone, but this interview was pure patty cake, kiss-kiss. <barf>
Yet, despite all of Fox Business News' warts and there are many, it is at least giving CNBC some competition. Nevertheless, they are often more liberal than CNBC - unbelievable.
The only other competition is Bloomberg TV. They are more clueless than the above two combined. Bloomberg TV goes out of its way to constantly highlight its Bloomberg platform - a professional trading platform. I can't remember when they have had a conservative on their network. I don't think they know any?
Because I’ll be relying
August 5, 2009 - 20:47 ET by maggieqpublicBecause I’ll be relying on my SEP-IRA at retirement time, I like to keep up with financial news. And I’m always trying to learn something, since Economics is not my strong suit.
Anyhow, after learning of Mr. Immelt’s/GE’s connections to the White House and Cap & Tax/Global Warming Polices, Health Care Reform (re medical record-keeping)… I realized that I was getting information from a cable station owned by a corporation with a serious conflict of interest, General Electric.
Bob Pisani’s glass has been half-full since January 20, but the regular appearance of Donny Deutsch put the frosting on the cake for me.
X
August 5, 2009 - 21:44 ET by serfer62Dear CNBC
I have kept my anger in check for some time about your programing, but now that you have realized your error in reporting you can regain us dissatisfied customers by moving to the left towards middle America.
Bring on more reasonable reporting by George Sorros or ACORN interviews. Al Gore is noticeably absent with his scientific explanation of the world, soon to end causing grief to women & minorities across the globe. Further input on the global benefits of the Medical Insurance particularly for non-green card visitors who will receive free medical care & social security.
Your soon to return audience
Karl
s62... LMAO! That's so
August 5, 2009 - 21:47 ET by bigtimers62...
LMAO!
That's so succinct...Immelt is grinning.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
"Anti-Obama tilt" is absurd.
August 5, 2009 - 22:14 ET by SweetnessI'm a trader, and have CNBC on for much of the day, though most of their analyst commentary is worthless.
IMO their anchors and reporters tend left, though there are conservative voices. John Harwood, the chief Washington correspondent, is a reliable liberal news filter, though he candidly acknowledged liberal news bias in comments earlier this year.
Rick Santelli is fantastic, a free market and common sense champion, and his debates with economics reporter and government apologist Steve Liesman are always entertaining.
I wish I could switch, but sadly, FBC is clearly inferior.
CNBC -FBN
August 6, 2009 - 07:39 ET by Mulligan22I like Kernan and Quick. Francis and Cabrerra are ok as well on CNBC. I believe they try to play it down the middle. But CNBC does have its regular lefties now.
As for FBN. It's just not up to par yet. Someone needs to tell Alexis Glick to shorten her questions. Try asking something in one sentence instead of rattling on and on before the questions pops out and I 'm bored. FBN is closer to a business entertainment network than anything else.
Perhaps they'll get better in time.
Right...that's the ticket.
August 6, 2009 - 07:12 ET by c5thenIt's the political proclivities of two correspondents on the network. Yeah, that's it.
Has nothing to do with the launch and meteoric rise of the Fox Business Channel as a direct competitor. Nope.
I think they've nailed it.
Throw 'da bums out!
no incumbent re-elected, with very few exceptions!
www.loyaltoliberty.com
FNC
August 6, 2009 - 07:41 ET by RoloTI too would like to make the morning switch from CNBC to FNC, but, Alexis Glick? Really, that's the best they can do. Calling her a lightweight would be an insult to lightweights.
August 6, 2009 - 08:02 ET by jessieHThat's what General Electric told them to do. Angry Mob!
I trade for a living
August 6, 2009 - 08:31 ET by bobthemanI trade for a living and its my experience CNBC is only good for the early morning financial reports... outside of that, they are completely unwatchable. When you peel away the layers of reporting, it boils down to nothing, absolutely nothing worth taking note. The talking heads and analyst have absolutely no clue what the market is going to do and what you end up with is pure financial opinion based on liberal leanings.
http://politicsofdes...
I agree with your
August 6, 2009 - 15:54 ET by jdhawkI agree with your comments. I am a morning trader only - 11-11:30 and I am done for the day.
Nice web site link. It sums up most of the web sites I go to for commentary. Thanks.