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: ron insana who wrote (1770)	9/24/1998 10:13:00 PM
From: lazarre	Respond to of 17683

Ron, My hypothetical flight into fictional dialogue was simply my way of illustrating, highlighting, accentuating my own sense that the way in which you frame some of your questions seem to have a built in bias towards the negative ( market sentiment wise ). I've seen not just a few guests first have to disagree with the premise of your question before they can even state their point of view. I think when a guest or analyst has to start off by taking issue with the way a question was posited ( the ones I have seen have been aptly politic by not looking askance; they are all uniformly and ---for the sake of future appearances I suspect--appropriately bland ), I think the question needs examination. Much like how questions are framed in a poll, there is sometimes a built-in spin aimed at eliciting a certain answer; often the answeree is unaware that a question they are answering is constructed in such a way. Or if they do sense it, they often feel, for one reason or another, that they are not in a position to challenge the way the question is framed. That said, I apologize if I have insulted; with the hypothetical dialogue, I might have overstated my case for a more balanced way of framing a market oriented question. At the risk of repeating myself, not all your questions have--what I think is--an orientation. But the few that there are cause me, as an active participant in the market, concern. I think I have that right. BTW, I always look forward to your " Ticker Talk " segments, finding them original, often thought provoking and pretty much free of a bias towards any point of view. Sincerely, Lazarre

To: ron insana who wrote (1770)	9/25/1998 2:43:00 AM
From: R.E.B.	Respond to of 17683

More CNBC critique: I enjoy the delivery of Ron Insana. Very professional and none of that cute side-bar social babble. Keep up the good work Ron. As for Kathleen Hays, my god in heaven. The only reason I don't throw up when she starts talking is because I have not yet eaten breakfast. Kathleen is the most rude person I have ever seen on T.V. She interrupts everyone and shouts them down and goes off on rediculous tangets to prove a point that no one cares about anyway. She talks faster than any human ear can comprehend. I was hoping that she would improve over the last two years, but no. Not a bit. She's got chip on her shoulders as big as New York and yet her views on bonds and currency trading sound like a beginner just learning the terminology, but not so sure what it means. I wish we could replace her with David Faber or Maria. Can you belive she actually argues with Jim Rogers as disrespectfully as she does? Jim has made more money in the market in 3 months than Kathleen will ever make in her whole lifetime. Let's see, did I pull any punches? I guess not. By the way Kathleen, when you dye your hair, don't forget to match your eyebrows. And get to those roots about 4 days earlier than you normally do, O.K.? R.E.B....... more to come

To: ron insana who wrote (1770)	9/25/1998 9:38:00 AM
From: PMS Witch	Respond to of 17683

"Not down on the market" So many people are "UP" on the market, an unbiased view may look "down" in comparison. As an investor, I find it necessary to hear BOTH sides of the story. Thank-you, PW. P.S. I don't mind Joe, Mark, and KH getting a little off topic once in a while. It gives a human touch.