For those of you that didn't see this last night:

[url]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/12/jim-cramer-on-daily-show-_n_174503.html[/url]

I'll tell you what, this was a little uncomfortable to watch. For those that are not aware, Stewart and Cramer have been going back and forth on their respective networks over the last week -- notwithstanding the clips that get played of their back-and-forth, it seemed to me from watching the full interviews that they were both still just doing their job, and that there was no actual animosity. I still think that, actually, at least personally.

I'll give you the Cliff's Notes version for those that don't want to sit through the interview: after some quick pleasantries, Stewart, sans jokes, absolutely eviscerates Cramer, and Cramer just sits and takes it. There's no yelling, it's not mean-spirited, but it is frank and very direct.

Two takeaways from this interview, for me at least:

1. John Stewart > Jim Cramer in terms of media clout. No way does Cramer go on The Daily Show, especially if he had any sense of what the interview would be like, unless he realized that he was getting the worst of this daily back-and-forth and wanted to stop the bleeding. I guess he did that, if exsanguination counts as "stopping" the bleeding.

2. To call The Daily Show a comedy show or a fake news show, although accurate, understates the role it plays in "serious" news. I can think of multiple situations where The Daily Show was the only place where politicians and other public figures would get called out on blatant hypocricy. Also, I think that sometimes humor and satire can deliver a message better than "straight" news/commentary can, and both Stewart and Colbert make this apparent on a nightly basis.

I wonder if Cramer didn't set himself up for this decidedly unfunny interview last night by deriding Stewart as a "comedian" -- almost as if Stewart took it as a challenge and was replying "yes, I'm a comedian, but at times there is a serious message behind what I do, regardless of how it may be delivered, and I can hold my own in the realm of the 'serious.'"

One final takeaway -- don't fuck with Jon Stewart. :lol:

Re: Jim Cramer on The Daily Show

[QUOTE=toasty;721617] One final takeaway -- don't fuck with Jon Stewart. :lol:[/QUOTE]

Couldn't have said it better! He really set Cramer in his place last night!

What an awkward and uncomfortable interview. I'm really surprised that Cramer actually agreed to this. The videos that Stewart showed of Cramer made him seem like total scum, and while Cramer seemed pretty apologetic and genuine he never provided very good explanations for what he did.

This was the most serious daily show that I've ever seen and I really think that Jon did an excellent job at putting Cramer in his place. I'm anxious to see if CNBC will actually get rid of the 'In Cramer We Trust' promo, They shook on it, and Cramer seemed pretty sincere so I think that this interview could promote some changes on his show.

I guess there's an extended version of this interview on thedailyshow.com for anyone that hasn't seen it or wants to see a full version.

Years ago I use to like Cramer, but over the past year or I've really began to dislike him. And after this whole thing started with him and Stewart I started disliking him even more b/c I've always been a big fan of the daily show and jon stewart. I do respect Cramer for going on the daily show and at least providing some explanations for what he had done. You could definitely tell that he was embarrassed by his actions...

Re: Jim Cramer on The Daily Show

It seemed that Cramer was nearly brought to tears multiple times during that interview, probably because he knew that there is no forgiving what he said on the clips Stewart showed.

It is quite ridiculous that a "news show" on Comedy freaking Central is the straightest-shooting, most integrity-filled journalism show on television these days. With that being said however, this makes me pretty damn grateful that somebody such as Jon Stewart has the ability to bare the truth on these things.

Jon Stewart can kick Chuck Norris' ass.

Re: Jim Cramer on The Daily Show

lol, this thread title at a glance I thought it said John Creamer

Re: Jim Cramer on The Daily Show

Popular opinion definitely seems to agree....

[URL]http://www.cnn.com/2009/SHOWBIZ/TV/03/13/cramer.stewart.reaction/index.html[/URL]

Re: Jim Cramer on The Daily Show

Jebus.... We are actually, truely fucked.. these bankers are crooks in suits and ties. TV does nothing to expose this, they just play along because wall street is their game.

I want to blow out my 401k and roll it into an IRA, or something where MY MONEY IS; MY MONEY.

[quote] That's not the problem with CNBC. The real problem is their reporting -- or lack thereof. The CNBC reporters and anchors make the Bush press corps look like draconian inquisitors. They are [URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9by4zHpF_M&feature=channel_page"]obsessed with access[/URL]. This is a problem with all of the media, and something Jon Stewart points out all the time. But it is particularly acute at CNBC (and all other business news channels). I have a close friend who works at a business news station -- and here is the worst kept secret in show business -- it's all about the access. If you piss off the CEOs or the companies, you're going to get a call from your boss. You have jeopardized our relationship with them! That is very thinly disguised code words for -- don't ever say anything negative about a company we cover otherwise your job is in the trouble. The message is clear -- go along to get along. This isn't journalism. It's public relations by another name. CNBC never did any exposés about the enormous risks these financial companies took. They never exposed the insanity of the derivatives market. And they never told their audience that [URL="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cenk-uygur/the-flaw-in-the-system-th_b_170963.html"]the executives of these companies have been robbing their shareholders blind[/URL]. Because they didn't see that as their job. They saw their job as doing whatever it took to keep Wall Street happy and playing ball with them. They were part of the broken system. There was no journalism going on at CNBC. That is what our underlying complaint is. That is what CNBC continues to miss to this day as they try to defend themselves by saying their words were taken out of context. The problem was the context! Will they straighten ship and start doing real investigative journalism uncovering the abuses of Wall Street now that they have been called out. I doubt it. That's not how they're structured. They don't view the average guy in their audience or the American public overall as their main constituency. They view Wall Street as their constituency. So, they will continue to serve them. [/quote]

[B][URL="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cenk-uygur/the-flaw-in-the-system-th_b_170963.html"][FONT=Georgia][COLOR=#111111]The Flaw in the System: The Bankers Don't Care About the Banks[/COLOR][/FONT][/URL][/B]

[quote] The enlightened self-interest of the bank executives has been separated from the interests of the banks they work for. In the 1970's, the banks were still privately owned. So, the guy up at the top wanted to protect his company, his interest and his money. If his executives took unwarranted risks with the boss's money, they were goners. But these days the people at the top of these companies don't own the companies. It's not their money. Here is how the [I]Wall Street Journal[/I] [URL="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123396915233059229.html"][COLOR=#058b7b]explains it[/COLOR][/URL] (a useful nugget in an otherwise horrible piece): [INDENT]"The Wall Street compensation system has evolved from the 1970s, when most of the firms were private partnerships, owned by partners who paid out a designated share of the firm's profits to nonpartner employees while dividing up the rest for themselves. The nonpartners had to earn their keep every year, but the partners' percentage ownerships in the firms were also reset every year or two. On the whole, everyone's performance was continuously evaluated and rewarded or penalized. The system provided great incentives to create profits, but also, because the partners' own money was involved, to avoid great risk."[/INDENT]These days, the way executives make money instead is in the form of bonuses

[/quote] Read these two articles I saw linked

quotes above:

[URL]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cenk-uygur/the-real-problem-with-cnb_b_173761.html[/URL]

[URL]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cenk-uygur/the-flaw-in-the-system-th_b_170963.html[/URL]

Re: Jim Cramer on The Daily Show

[quote=|Thrax|;721739]Jebus.... We are actually, truely fucked.. these bankers are crooks in suits and ties. TV does nothing to expose this, they just play along because wall street is their game.

I want to blow out my 401k and roll it into an IRA, or something where MY MONEY IS; MY MONEY.

[B][URL="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cenk-uygur/the-flaw-in-the-system-th_b_170963.html"][FONT=Georgia][COLOR=#111111]The Flaw in the System: The Bankers Don't Care About the Banks[/COLOR][/FONT][/URL][/B]

Read these two articles I saw linked

quotes above:

[URL]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cenk-uygur/the-real-problem-with-cnb_b_173761.html[/URL]

[URL]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cenk-uygur/the-flaw-in-the-system-th_b_170963.html[/URL][/quote]

Love Cenk Uygur -- probably my favorite political commentator. Are you a Young Turks fan?

Re: Jim Cramer on The Daily Show

[quote=Miroslav;721720]Popular opinion definitely seems to agree....

[URL]http://www.cnn.com/2009/SHOWBIZ/TV/03/13/cramer.stewart.reaction/index.html[/URL][/quote]

Interesting read. How ironic would it be if this actually [B]was [/B]viewed as a watershed moment in journalism, as the article suggests. I doubt that will actually happen, but [B]do[/B] I suspect we won't people deriding Stewart as "just a comedian" anymore -- would be an invitation to be Cramered.

Re: Jim Cramer on The Daily Show

Not to belabor this point, but one thing I've heard over and over today is people just agog at the fact that the most jaw-dropping interview since Katie Couric and Sarah Palin had their little tete-a-tete was conducted by a comedian -- lots of the "why is it that it takes a comedy show to do this sort of journalism?" Here's hoping that this will encourage the "real" journalists out there to wake up to the fact that people are receptive to someone doing something other than tossing softballs and/or mindlessly regurgitating, without inquiry or criticism, others' talking points.

Re: Jim Cramer on The Daily Show

Thanks for the video, I missed the episode when it aired here yesterday.

Re: Jim Cramer on The Daily Show

This reminds me of when the internet stocks went bust around 2001 along with 9/11 making things worse. People poured money into stocks of internet companies that were worthless. No one questioned things because everyone was getting paid. The analysts and media are too intertwined to call each other out. Therefore, it takes a comedic journalist like Jon Stewart outside the normal media to ask the tough questions. And like Stewart said finance is not a game and these are people's lives that are impacted.

Re: Jim Cramer on The Daily Show

Here's a thought for everyone:

Who on God's green earth would buy or sell a stock based on what Jim Cramer or CNBC says? You've got to be out of your fucking mind. First of all, John Stewart is right: these guys are entertainers - being a negativistic realist on TV just doesn't sell well. Second of all, I'd submit that most markets are on average semi-strong efficient; any info you get from Cramer is OLD. The market already "knows" about it and has priced it in - and everyone is already trading on it. Just don't listen to anyone on the media who recommends you to buy or sell anything. EVER.

Re: Jim Cramer on The Daily Show

So what do you think? Should the media take more responsibility?

This is a tough example to argue:

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4spOZjyAIc[/YOUTUBE]