For starters, that headline alone is atrocious. Two nouns and a preposition. Both nouns having nothing to do with CNBC
- "News"? CNBC? Mostly propaganda, in fact. Any real 'news' that CNBC reports on (like stock prices) you can get anywhere.
- "Attitude"? CNBC? C'mon Times, you can do better. How 'bout "bias", or "ideology", or "faith", or "Friedman"?
I'm OK with the word 'with'.
All in all, the thing is a complete softball, and utterly missed the deep-seated venom regular folks (those 'higher ratings' endlessly noted in the article who tuned into CNBC in a time of crisis looking for, ummm, news, and got, well, screwed as they were endlessly told to keep buying stocks) feel towards the network. There's a reason that Stewart's skewering was such a 'viral video sensation', and the Times is utterly clueless about it....
Missed opportunity, big time
No comments:
Post a Comment