Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : CNBC -- critique. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mark Marcellus who wrote (6160)	7/8/2000 1:52:47 AM
From: Gary M. Reed	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17683

Mark, While we are on opposing sides of the proverbial "aisle," I agree with you 110%. CNBC has no business reporting political angles--left OR right--unless they can be directly conveyed into somehow materially effecting the markets in some way. If I want to hear political jargon, I can tune into CNN or Fox News Network...I don't want nor need it from a so-called financial channel. The very slanted news coverage (a la Alina Cho, et. al.) needs to go as well. How many times did CNBC tell us that John Rocker was a racist? Too many. Question 2--in that same vein: How many times has CNBC told us the story of Rashard Casey, the starting QB for Penn State--a bigger racist? Answer: None. centredaily.com For those who aren't familiar with the story, according to local newspaper reports, Mr. Casey and an associate were arrested last month after jumping an off-duty Hoboken, NJ police officer and beating the crap out of him, to the point where the cop needs surgery. The reason the cop was assaulted by Penn State QB Casey? According to newspaper reports and eyewitness accounts, Casey and his pal attacked the cop because the cop was white and was accompanying a black woman into the club. According to an eyewitness, "Casey and (his accomplice), who are black, yelled at the woman that she shouldn't be with a white man." And that was what spurred the attack. Now, given the fact that this Casey thug is the starting QB for a national powerhouse college football team--arguably just as prominent as a relief pitcher on the Atlanta Braves--where is the media outrage? John Rocker spoke of hatred--Rashard Casey acted it out. There's a big, big difference there. Yet, where is CNN's and CNBC's and all of the liberal media outrage over Casey? You don't see it, and that speaks volumes of the double standard in the media. Proof positive. Why hasn't this Casey thug been charged with a hate crime? Per my understanding of the new hate crime legislation, it fits the description perfectly. At the very least, he makes John Rocker look like a choir boy. Where is the outrage? Where is Jesse Jackson--the self-proclaimed avenger of racism? Anyone wanting to debate mainstream media's objectiveness need only look at the difference between the way Rocker and Casey have been treated...you don't need to be a rocket-scientist to see the difference. I was always taught that racism was wrong, period. The media tells us racism is only wrong in certain situations--depending on who the involved parties are, it can be deemed as perfectly acceptable behavior. At least as far as CNBC and Jesse Jackson are concerned.

To: Mark Marcellus who wrote (6160)	7/8/2000 9:52:52 AM
From: long-gone	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17683

If all you can find wrong with this President is perjury then no wonder you can't see anything wrong with payoffs by Fannie & Freddie. Fannie & Freddie are at their base political.

To: Mark Marcellus who wrote (6160)	7/8/2000 12:50:08 PM
From: Michael Grosz	Respond to of 17683

Way, Way, OT Just a point of clarification. Whether one believes that cigarettes (or nicotine, tobacco, et al.) are addictive can clearly be a point of debate. I happen to believe that they are habit forming, and the habit can be broken. Therefore, tobacco is not addictive. To anyone reading this who is can call themselves objective (I rule myself out), is that the same kind of parsing that I criticize our President for?

To: Mark Marcellus who wrote (6160)	8/3/2000 8:20:21 AM
From: long-gone	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 17683

OT Hey, you were all "P.O.ed" at the evil "big tobacco", why aren't you & CNBC talking this? This isn't exactly the first we've heard questioning Cell Phone safety? Is it because Cell Phones are such a big part of the "new economy"? Tuesday August 1 5:52 PM ET US Investigating Cell Phone Health Risks By Laura GilcrestWASHINGTON (Reuters Health) - Amid mounting concerns that the Golden Age of communication may have a dark side, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is turning to outside experts to help assess whether the cell phone may pose an adverse health risk through radiation. At an August 1st workshop in Gaithersburg, MD, officials from FDA's Center for Devices and Radiologic Health (CDRH) met with scientific and technological leaders to begin to develop an approach for putting the troubling theory about cell phones to the test.(cont) dailynews.yahoo.com