It isn't news...it's CNN

[WickerBill]

First and foremost, this isn't about politics, but it has a political figure in it. What I'm trying to whine about is the kind of things that are reported as news by our wonderful friends at US-based news websites. The latest example is on CNN's top stories (not unusual):

"Beauty who beat Palin backs Obama"
and
"Comedian: Uterus not enough to win my vote"


So, back when Sarah Palin was a beauty pageant contestant, this lady beat her, and she's voting for Obama. And a comedian wants Obama to win.

This is news? Seriously? News? We care about this one person's vote why?

Here are some news items this nugget has bumped off of the top stories list:

Body of missing girl found
Pakistan mosque attack kills 25
Nepal alters policy regarding Tibetan exiles


I'm reading the international edition of CNN.com, by the way. It just blows my mind that there don't seem to be any US news sites that keep that kind of pseudo-news crap off of the front page.

Am I nitpicking? This isn't because I'm hypersensitive about Palin -- far from it. Last week (maybe 10 days ago) it was something like "Obama says his jump shot needs work", bumping foreclosure news and Georgia/Russia news off of the top stories.

[chop456]

No kidding. :shakehead

Does Jim Lehrer have a website?

[Rogue Leader]

Dont waste your time with CNN, its widely known as Communist News Network. Most of the others are worthless too. Fox News is the only one thats not totally whacked.

[chop456]

And away we go! :laugh:

[Insomniac]

It's typical off all the 24-Hour news networks at this point. News isn't news anymore. It's now "coverage". The nightly news isn't so bad. While they cover the same crap as their lead, they get to other news afterwards. Sadly, it's what the people want. I said it before, I miss News World International. Al Gore's group bought them out and turned them into Current TV. :( Even Headline News is shifting that way. Headline Prime, Nancy Grace, Glenn Beck...

[Insomniac]

Sadly, I feel like there's just nothing out there that isn't biased in some way. I get tired of every network. Even websites, I feel like they're biased by omission many times. Now I just try and read as much as I can.

[Methanolandbrats]

Broadcast media outlets are all chasing ad dollars which means they must chase ratings which means the majority of people watch that crap which means the country is becoming dumber every year.

[Stu]

Sadly, I feel like there's just nothing out there that isn't biased in some way. I get tired of every network. Even websites, I feel like they're biased by omission many times. Now I just try and read as much as I can.

i'm ok with biases.

im not ok with networks proclaiming that their biased coverage is fair.

fox news leans right but says they are fair and balanced. then you have cnn on the left. and there's MSNBC in the corner of Karl Marx.

thats fine if thats how they want to cover the news, but dont try to pass it off as fair, balanced, nonpartisan, etc.

talk radio is the only medium that i could think of that is willing to admit they are on the right with people like Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, etc. Air America also admits they are on the left (Im assuming they are still on the air). there is bias, but they tell you about it.

[WickerBill]

I'm less concerned with bias than with giving me the news. Who, exactly, is choosing what CNN's top stories are? The editor of Maxim? Perez Hilton?

I want to read the news -- not the gossip, not the opinion pieces, not the human interest stories. My web browser will take me to people.com if that's what I'm after.

[chop456]

What if Timmy O' Toole's stuck down the well? You want to be the last to know? :D

I know I've said this a billion times, but if someone actually wants TV news, I see no options besides Lehrer and the BBC.

[eiregosod]

These news providers think they ARE the news, that is the problem.

[Andrew Longman]

I haven't watch more than a few minutes of TV news in ages. And it has been 20 years since I've watch local TV news. (I've actually imposed a ban on it in my home because I think it causes hysteria and mental illness :gomer:)

I read three papers a day (one for real and two on-line). That, the occasional Charlie Rose interview, a political blog or two and my friends at OC are enough.

[rosawendel]

This is the type of stuff that keeps Fark running (love fark by the way).

[JLMannin]

I'm less concerned with bias than with giving me the news. Who, exactly, is choosing what CNN's top stories are? The editor of Maxim? Perez Hilton?

I want to read the news -- not the gossip, not the opinion pieces, not the human interest stories. My web browser will take me to people.com if that's what I'm after.

My son, who is 14 and could care less what Paris Hilton or Brittney Spears do on a daily basis has chosen to watch BBC America to get a better idea of events happening in the world. He was appalled when Russia invaded Georgia and there was zero coverage on the evening news.

It taught him a valuable lesson that if you want to be aware of what happens in the world, you have to work actively to find the information you desire to know and run it through your own personnal "bias filter" to inperpret it.

[nrc]

This is a test, right? If we can negotiate this minefield we achieve Zen Tenth Level Mastery of Forum Moderation? :D

It's a combination of personal agendas, media members seeking celebrity, and the Diggification of all news media. Ratings are votes for coverage so least common denominator tripe tends to rise to the top.

Craig Ferguson had a good rant the other night that touched on this.


It's like they're covering Paris and Nicole. I'm watching this. "Look at her hair and hat." If Walter Cronkite could see these brain-dead morons yapping about flag pins & hairstyles, he'd turn over in his grave. Which is weird because cause Cronkite is still alive and well and lives in Martha's Vineyard. If he were dead he would be furious!

pdRVQ4xwwmQ
s1good-Ifdg

[ChampcarShark]

I have to agree with most of you, the news are not news anymore.

Good thing we have FOX to cover some news.

[TKGAngel]

These news providers think they ARE the news, that is the problem.

Exhibit A: The uproar generated over MSNBC's RNC coverage and ensuing aftermath. Reading some accounts of the backstage politics over there makes me think that Tim Russert is rolling over in his grave right about now.

[G.]

TV news is not news, it's entertainment.

I don't find it to be entertaining at all.

BBCA and read.

The only time TV news is on is when MIL is over, or a big happening, like when your neighbor gets arrested by Homeland Security. :laugh:

[datachicane]

I know I've said this a billion times, but if someone actually wants TV news, I see no options besides Lehrer and the BBC.

This bears repeating.
Print's nearly as bad, aside from the CSM.

The birth of modern PR and marketing techniques in the last century has lead to the near-extinction of the informed electorate, and thus democracy itself. Trying to have a reasonable political discussion with most folks on either side of the spectrum is no different than analytically parsing whether Coke or Pepsi is superior- it's all identity and investment in personal opinion and no thoughtful analysis.

Most Americans can't even begin to explain the reasoning behind the opposition's position, since they didn't base their own choice on reason at all. They're left with no alternative to explain the distinction besides simply demonizing the other side (they're all corrupt and/or morally bankrupt and/or hate America and/or love terrorists and/or want a theocratic police state and/or are criminals/communists/socialists/fascists/radicals/neo-crypto-illuminati).

I don't see any solution, easy or otherwise, on the horizon.
Welcome to the Madison Ave. kleptocracy!

[Ankf00]

TV news is not news, it's entertainment.


this.

[dando]

Exhibit A: The uproar generated over MSNBC's RNC coverage and ensuing aftermath. Reading some accounts of the backstage politics over there makes me think that Tim Russert is rolling over in his grave right about now.

Indeed. Tim was only person that made *NBC worth watching, or the networks in general. :(

-Kevin

[Methanolandbrats]

I repeat, it's all about $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ and as long as huge numbers of people are interested in Angelina's latest calving or some such garbage, that's what gets covered. Only way around it is to read newspapers and wire copy online before the editors get ahold of it.

[dando]

I repeat, it's all about $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ and as long as huge numbers of people are interested in Angelina's latest calving or some such garbage, that's what gets covered. Only way around it is to read newspapers and wire copy online before the editors get ahold of it.
Or Drudge. :gomer:

-Kevin

[cameraman]

TV news is about selling ad time, it has nothing to do with information.


Jim Lehrer - http://www.pbs.org/newshour/video/
The Economist - http://www.economist.com/
The Christian Science Monitor - http://www.csmonitor.com/
The Wall Street Journal & The NY Times - they balance each other
The BBC - http://news.bbc.co.uk/
Der Spiegel - http://www.spiegel.de/international/

[Insomniac]

i'm ok with biases.

im not ok with networks proclaiming that their biased coverage is fair.

fox news leans right but says they are fair and balanced. then you have cnn on the left. and there's MSNBC in the corner of Karl Marx.

thats fine if thats how they want to cover the news, but dont try to pass it off as fair, balanced, nonpartisan, etc.

talk radio is the only medium that i could think of that is willing to admit they are on the right with people like Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, etc. Air America also admits they are on the left (Im assuming they are still on the air). there is bias, but they tell you about it.

My main point was I can't watch any of these channels for that much time. I really just want news, but it's so hard to get. And when you do, there is commentary added. It's just a sad state with what has happened. Important news isn't really important unless it is breaking and when real news is covered, you get more than the facts.

[Ankf00]

^^^ this.

I want news. 0 talking head commentary.

[Elmo T]

FWIW, CNN International seems like much better coverage than CNN.

[oddlycalm]

Good thread WB. You're right, it's not about politics at all. It's about reporting actual news as opposed to spewing intellectual sewage. My take is that the film "Network" has been one of the most prescient in memory.

The 24hr cable "news" abominations (without exception) have had a large hand in dumbing down the discourse as has talk radio. They've got endless hours to fill and they fill it by targeting the lowest common denominator and baser human instincts in order to ring up profits. It amounts to intellectual pollution and the result is that we are turning into a giant third world country with elections that resemble the choosing of a favorite beer commercial.

I'd add Reuters and McClatchy to cameraman's list. I'm a BBCA fan for broadcast and CSM fan for print/web. We had a Christian Science reading room in the town I grew up in and that was an early habit that stuck with me through school. If it hadn't been next to the candy store things might have turned out weirder...:gomer:

oc

[Sean Malone]

A popular internet conspiracy theory movie sites tabloid style journalism from the mainstream media as the prime tool for the 'dumbing down of America'. ( it doesn't take a conspiracy to figure that one out! )
It used excerpts of the movie "Network" as a mechanism to alert the masses. :)

I'm pretty sure that the big news websites use usage reports to prioritize their articles. Probably automated. I frequently see buried tabloid news articles rise the headline days later...why?...because it got more clicks than their other links. Popularity dictates America's mediocre racing, chain restaurants on every corner, crap beer, our elected officials etc etc ad nauseum.

:(

[nissan gtp]

Fox News is like a parody of news. It's about as objective as "The Daily Show", and nowhere near as funny.

[Sean Malone]

Fox News is like a parody of news. It's about as objective as "The Daily Show", and nowhere near as funny.

Newspapers have been even more blatantly biased for 100+ years.

[eiregosod]

how can they implemet the communistic takeover of Federal Mortgages if everyone is watching the news :tony:

[Methanolandbrats]

Fox News is like a parody of news. It's about as objective as "The Daily Show", and nowhere near as funny. Thank you, the reason it's not funny is a lot of people think it's real :shakehead

[Sean Malone]

Thank you, the reason it's not funny is a lot of people think it's real :shakehead

How is it any different than MSNBC or CNN? Let me guess; because they don't slant toward your preferred political denomination you put them up on the pedestal as being the single, non real outlet. Not defending them, simply asking.

[nrc]

Ok, the problem with the discussion of the fact that this or that network is politically biased is that as soon as we start talking about that we start dividing into camps and then we may was well be talking about politics.

So no further discussion of the bias or "unreality" of the different networks, please. That's really not what WB was talking about.

[Ankf00]

Newspapers have been even more blatantly biased for 100+ years.

modern cable news is the equivalent of 1900's yellow journalism.

modern print journalism is lightyears beyond what's available on cable/network TV short of PBS/BBC

[Sean Malone]

modern cable news is the equivalent of 1900's yellow journalism.

modern print journalism is lightyears beyond what's available on cable/network TV short of PBS/BBC

No doubt. For years now I never cease to be amazed every time I parse through the top headlines of the various news outlets and see that the majority of the headlines are "burglary suspect jumps wall, plunges to death","Cat found wedged beside hot car engine", "alligator eats teens arm", "shark bites man" etc. If it 'bleeds it leads' has never been more true than now. Add in the news on Brittany Spears new body or Angelina Jolie's new adopted Asian child makes one wonder if there is any other news actually worth reading.

Maybe there isn't. :)

[nrc]

Again, we're not having any further discussion of political bias in cable networks.

[devilmaster]

To speak to WB's original post - that's why i luuuuvvvv the internet. Its truly news the way I want it.

Scan the headlines, read what i want - if a story interests me, I usually read a few different reports on that particular story. And that way I feel I've gotten the lowdown and then I can make my own opinion on the situation.

A perfect example was in today's detroit free press. Headline: 'Ike strands freighter'. When in truth, when you read the story, the freighter became disabled in the path of Ike.

Nothing like a bogus headline.. :saywhat: Which they have now taken off the website.

[dando]

To speak to WB's original post - that's why i luuuuvvvv the internet. Its truly news the way I want it.

Scan the headlines, read what i want - if a story interests me, I usually read a few different reports on that particular story. And that way I feel I've gotten the lowdown and then I can make my own opinion on the situation.

A perfect example was in today's detroit free press. Headline: 'Ike strands freighter'. When in truth, when you read the story, the freighter became disabled in the path of Ike.

Nothing like a bogus headline.. :saywhat: Which they have now taken off the website.

Speaking of the InnerWebs and news, an interesting article on the recent UAL bankruptcy report debacle:

http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article4742147.ece

:saywhat:

-Kevin

[datachicane]

To speak to WB's original post - that's why i luuuuvvvv the internet. Its truly news the way I want it.

Scan the headlines, read what i want - if a story interests me, I usually read a few different reports on that particular story. And that way I feel I've gotten the lowdown and then I can make my own opinion on the situation.


I agree to a certain extent, but there's also a danger in that. Folks of a certain disposition will just shop news sources until they find one that reinforces whatever 'perspective'<coughprejudicecough> they're inclined to follow in the first place, and God knows the internet contains enough paranoids and wackos to back up any nutjob and make him feel like part of a special community.

Thirty years ago there were a relative handful of sources that the nation relied on, so even if our priorities and premises differed we were at least working from a common starting point. Now it's often difficult to believe that we're even talking about the same events, even when the facts are known and verifiable. It's as if objective reality carries no more weight than opinion, since it's easy enough to find a community that denies any reality a citizen may wish to avoid. It's basically intellectual balkanization.

Don't even get me started with editorials (and 'infotainment' talk radio)- they regularly contain so many grevious factual errors that it's difficult to see how any reasonably informed opinion could be formed by them. I find it difficult to believe that their authors aren't fully aware of their truthful shortcomings, and simply choose not to let them get in the way of a good opinion.

[JoeBob]

While, like others, I'm curious as to how they decide which headlines to publish on the front page of cnn.com - I'm even more curious as to how they decide which headlines you can buy printed on T-Shirts.

Next to certain headlines, you'll see this icon: http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/img/2.0/global/icons/icon_tshirt.gif. That icons means you can buy that headline printed on a T-Shirt.

Because you'd look fashionable wearing these: http://www.cnn.com/tshirt/archive/

For some reason, you can't get a shirt that says, "37,000 may need to be saved from Ike." Which is too bad, if you have a friend named Ike.

[emjaya]

I don't watch TV news. It bugs me that some hill-billy in backwoods, USA, rolling his stolen car into someones front yard is big news because they have video footage of it.



Jim Lehrer - http://www.pbs.org/newshour/video/
[/url]

We get this in Oz. I watch it when I can. I'd never heard of Jim Lehrer before? Is he well repected?

The roll call at the end is tough to watch sometimes. :(

[devilmaster]

I agree to a certain extent, but there's also a danger in that. Folks of a certain disposition will just shop news sources until they find one that reinforces whatever 'perspective'<coughprejudicecough> they're inclined to follow in the first place

There's the rub. We can sit here and bitch all day long about media bias, but there are people out there who won't budge off of their own opinion to look at the other viewpoints. I agree thats a problem, but in my post i was speaking to my own experience. I have always tried to keep an open perspective on everything - and what bugs me is people who can't come off of their own viewpoint regardless of what is debated against them. (coughcoughstucoughcoughogormancoughcough) :D But then again, those people are the most fun to poke and prod cause they back themselves into a corner so much that its easy to make them look idiotic cause they must defend their position.


Don't even get me started with editorials (and 'infotainment' talk radio)- they regularly contain so many grevious factual errors that it's difficult to see how any reasonably informed opinion could be formed by them. I find it difficult to believe that their authors aren't fully aware of their truthful shortcomings, and simply choose not to let them get in the way of a good opinion.

Speaking of that, i always remember one detroit tv station years ago doing a report on the possibility of making a paperclip mile oval at State Fairgrounds on 8 mile. They used hidden footage of the infield at MIS, and said that this track would invite the boozehounds, overindulgers, flashers and other bastions of a great society to an area that was more or less residential. It was so flawed i was laughing in disbelief. I sent 2 or 3 emails begging - almost pleading - to allow rebuttal airtime and I explained my position that the original report was so biased and bogus and I sent examples of photos of other mile ovals that showed that it was near impossible for the reporter's forecast to be accurate.

Never even got a 'we got your email' formed response. :gomer:

[oddlycalm]

Thirty years ago there were a relative handful of sources that the nation relied on, so even if our priorities and premises differed we were at least working from a common starting point. Now it's often difficult to believe that we're even talking about the same events, even when the facts are known and verifiable. It's as if objective reality carries no more weight than opinion, since it's easy enough to find a community that denies any reality a citizen may wish to avoid. It's basically intellectual balkanization.

Absolutely right. There can be many opinions but there is only one set of facts.

IMO media consolidation enters into this as well. We could very well find ourselves in a situation where the verifiable facts become unknowable. We have already gone a very long ways down that particular road. A handful of companies control 90% of what is on television and they also own radio stations and in some cases newspapers as well. The same company is now allowed to own a TV station, radio stations and newspapers in the same market. :thumdown: And, they would dearly like to control access to the inteweb as well.

FCC degregulation isn't a partisan issue, it's been going on under administrations and congresses dominated by both parties, but the fact that both parties seem to agree doesn't mean much more than both sides were bought off. It's pretty much impossible to make a case for there being any advantage to the public that actually owns those airwaves.

The current storm brings up another aspect of this; what happens when all there are no local radio stations any longer? This was a problem after Katrina and if it weren't for one particular low-power local guy staying up day and night to put out emergency information updates there would have been none at all. The centrally programmed big media stations just went on playing their normal content like good robots.:irked: Nice to have that pre-programmed content to keep you rockin' while you're on your roof with the family and the water keeps on rising...

Of course that didn't stop the large media conglomerates from fighting tooth and nail to block the FCC from granting low power licenses last year. Not enough to have 99%, they want it all...:shakehead


oc

[RusH]

http://www.reuters.com/

[eiregosod]

http://www.reuters.com/

ouch , bad day for the banks

[oddlycalm]

ouch , bad day for the banks
Bad for all of us if it turns into a chain reaction.

oc

[Insomniac]

So debt is killing all these companies. Think someone might point out how much debt the U.S. Gov't is in and how that may not be so good long term? Who am I kidding.

[Ankf00]

govt asked GS & JPM to loan AIG some cash money.

[Don Quixote]

govt asked GS & JPM to loan AIG some cash money.
They asked Juan Pablo Montoya for cash?!! What did he say?

[eiregosod]

So debt is killing all these companies. Think someone might point out how much debt the U.S. Gov't is in and how that may not be so good long term? Who am I kidding.

didn't you get the memo?

debt=wealth :tony:

[WickerBill]

They asked Juan Pablo Montoya for cash?!! What did he say?

He said "I'm no corporate puppet!"

(this is a test to see how many people actually watch NASCAR)

[extramundane]

They asked Juan Pablo Montoya for cash?!! What did he say?

"F***ing idiot! You broke my f***king head!"

[Gnam]

"F***ing idiot! You broke my f***king head!"
http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/7653/piggybank320aj2.jpg

[Insomniac]

didn't you get the memo?

debt=wealth :tony:

D'oh I missed that one. I'll never bring it up again. Baaaaaaa-aaaaah. Baaaaaaa-aaaah.

[oddlycalm]

So debt is killing all these companies.
Not exactly, more like assets formerly valued at tens of $ billions that are no longer worth anything. Unregulated derivatives specifically, or as the financial guys euphemistically refer to them, "engineered financial instruments". They went poof and are no more. The engineers never stopped to consider what would happen if the underlying dept the securities represented could no longer be valued accurately. :tony:

It's one thing when a dufus rich guy inherits a race track and proceeds to farq up our racing. In this case a whole bunch of rich guys that were supposed to be a lot smarter weren't, and all of us (and our kids and grandkids) get to pay to clean up their cockup even though they insisted that we had no right to regulate their trade. :saywhat:

Of course that's if all of it doesn't create an domino effect that takes us back to the economic stone age as it did after 1929.

oc

[Insomniac]

Not exactly, more like assets formerly valued at tens of $ billions that are no longer worth anything. Unregulated derivatives specifically, or as the financial guys euphemistically refer to them, "engineered financial instruments". They went poof and are no more. The engineers never stopped to consider what would happen if the underlying dept the securities represented could no longer be valued accurately. :tony:

It's one thing when a dufus rich guy inherits a race track and proceeds to farq up our racing. In this case a whole bunch of rich guys that were supposed to be a lot smarter weren't, and all of us (and our kids and grandkids) get to pay to clean up their cockup even though they insisted that we had no right to regulate their trade. :saywhat:

Of course that's if all of it doesn't create an domino effect that takes us back to the economic stone age as it did after 1929.

oc

I guess I generalized a little bit. ;)

These guys overextended themselves and had terrible risk models. They all thought they were so clever. The government can't keep on taking on debt, it will become untenable at some point.

[Michaelhatesfans]

Of course that's if all of it doesn't create an domino effect that takes us back to the economic stone age as it did after 1929.


Hey, look on the bright side, maybe we'll get another Timberline Lodge out of it.;)

[oddlycalm]

I guess I generalized a little bit. ;)

These guys overextended themselves and had terrible risk models. They all thought they were so clever.

Indeed. Looks to me like the only thing not fully priced in their little derivitives poker game was risk...:irked:

oc

[Insomniac]

Indeed. Looks to me like the only thing not fully priced in their little derivitives poker game was risk...:irked:

oc

I imagine it was taken into account, but the models were horribly inaccurate. I heard that last year, before it all went to hell, Goldman flipped their positions (while their IB side told people to keep buying) when they finally realized the models were wrong. Their models were telling them the probability of what is happening right now was less than one centillionth (decimal point, 302 zeroes, 1) as late as last summer!

[JLMannin]

The whole concept of credit derivatives always seemed to be one of those deal that is too good to be true - a bet that pays off no matter what happens.

I know I am likely oversimplifying things, but that was always my first impression.

[cameraman]

Their models were telling them the probability of what is happening right now was less than one centillionth (decimal point, 302 zeroes, 1) as late as last summer!

Any statistical package that returns a number like that is absolute crap:flame:

Anyone who would put any faith in such a number is an abject fool.

[datachicane]

http://xirdal.lmu.de/xirdalium/xpix/greed.png

[Ankf00]

The whole concept of credit derivatives always seemed to be one of those deal that is too good to be true - a bet that pays off no matter what happens.

I know I am likely oversimplifying things, but that was always my first impression.

auction rate securities... AS GOOD AS CASH, REALLY!!!

[Insomniac]

Any statistical package that returns a number like that is absolute crap:flame:

Anyone who would put any faith in such a number is an abject fool.

Unfortunately, looking at the markets, there were tons of them.

[eiregosod]

"For years now, we have had to listen to bankers attacking Washington for imposing regulations that inhibit the free markets from making even more money. And all the while, they took exorbitant salaries, justifying them on the grounds of their huge contribution to capitalism. How bitterly ironic it is, then, to see these one-time freemarketeers becoming socialists overnight. The schoolyard bullies of Wall Street have gone running to the state for help, pleading to be saved from destruction."


from the UK's daily mail.

[oddlycalm]

"For years now, we have had to listen to bankers attacking Washington for imposing regulations that inhibit the free markets from making even more money. And all the while, they took exorbitant salaries, justifying them on the grounds of their huge contribution to capitalism. How bitterly ironic it is, then, to see these one-time freemarketeers becoming socialists overnight. The schoolyard bullies of Wall Street have gone running to the state for help, pleading to be saved from destruction."

Yes, ironic that the regulated banks are just fine. It was the unregulated investment banks where all the trouble was. Now we are seeing the regulated retail banks like B of A and Wachovia taking over once massive investment shops for pennies on the dollar while others nibble on Lehman's carcass.

AIG, an insurance company like no other in the world with $ 1 over trillion in assets, will get unceremoniously carved up and sold off not because the insurance and airplane leasing business units had trouble, but because the parent company went bust. The management team that replaced founder Hank Greenberg 3yrs ago took on stupid risk that experienced insurance people would never have given a second look. :thumdown:

oc

[Gnam]

Dave Chappelle is from the future.



AIG......................buncha b******
Merrill Lynch..........broke ass b******
Lehaman Brothers...old ass b******

STEP TO THE WU!

http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/9604/278ph7.jpg

We all know that cash rules everything around us; cash, green, get the money, dollar dollar bill ya'll.

This ain't trading places - THiS IS REAL ****ING LIFE - PROTECT YO GODDAMN NECK!

[eiregosod]

Yes, ironic that the regulated banks are just fine. It was the unregulated investment banks where all the trouble was. Now we are seeing the regulated retail banks like B of A and Wachovia taking over once massive investment shops for pennies on the dollar while others nibble on Lehman's carcass.

AIG, an insurance company like no other in the world with $ 1 over trillion in assets, will get unceremoniously carved up and sold off not because the insurance and airplane leasing business units had trouble, but because the parent company went bust. The management team that replaced founder Hank Greenberg 3yrs ago took on stupid risk that experienced insurance people would never have given a second look. :thumdown:

oc

I love inductry big wigs demanding self-regulation.

Insurance companies do the same thing as collateralised debt obligations and sell on the insurance to unsuspecting suckers, eventually they end up buying back the same insurance they originally wrote in the first place. not sure if that was AIGs downfall.

[JohnHKart]

Agreed totally. I'm going to a different website for news I think after what I saw there today. I do not need to know about an actor beating a poor cat to death. I almost lost it seeing that. That was on the front page of their website. I don't want to know. That is not news...I just want to know if there is a major news story.

John

[gjc2]

Newspapers have been even more blatantly biased for 100+ years.

When Richard Nixon was re-elected, carrying 49 states one NY Times reporter said, how can that be, no one I know voted for him