Mr. David,
Thanks for the quick response. Yes, I do agree that news needs to be reported.
Rumors such as your examples I would assume are to easy verify.
However, a rumor such as "There are rumors from the trading floor that Company XXX lost the bid on a contract", also move the markets.
I understand your point that reporting on rumors is, in fact, news.
However, by also reporting on a factually deplete rumor such as the one I gave as an example, is in a way crying "Fire" in a crowded movie theater.
I know that it would be difficult to track down the source of any and all rumors, but is there anyway CNBC could track down the source, such as the trading desk, or even perhaps the trader?
Like in my previous post, if I posted something on a message board, such as "Company XXX is going to file bankruptcy". I am held accountable if it is considered to be incorrect.
Why not hold all who spread those rumors accountable? I mean, come on, a trading floor knowing something about the company? I would give a rumor more crediblity if it came from a research department, but a trading floor?
Good day.
By the way, as an anchor on CNBC, I read somewhere (forgot where) that you cannot hold stocks. Is that correct? |
