The Prestidigitator

You got to give Cramer credit for coming on the show and taking his lumps like a man. Most people in his position would have just found themselves too busy attending a no-comment convention.

Quite a few reviewers said that Jon Stewart was way too serious for a comic, but when the court is sleeping, it is the jester that has to speak up.

Indian journalists do that. Why only recently had Karan Thapar and Arun Shourie exchanged words during an interview… and Rajdeep Sardesai had practically two elderly netas in a corner in the aftermath of the Mumbai attacks. It’s just that when that happens, people don’t highlight it as in other countries.

@bpsk The way I see it, Cramer had no choice. It would have been a PR disaster for CNBC if he snubbed Stewart like Santelli did. Wait, it *is* a PR disaster.

@indisch I did think of Karan Thapar. See, the problem is, these interviews get very little exposure outside of the English speaking populace. That restricts it from truly being akin to what Stewart did – channeling public anger.

I’d like to see more popular news channels in regional languages do what Thapar and Sardesai do.

@PS: Dude, while I thoroughly enjoyed the “discussion,” I couldn’t but wonder the time when Jon Stewart was called into Cross Fire, where he openly declared that he was into comedy and NOT into journalism. And while I respect, and even appreciate what he’s doing for the world, I couldn’t but feel sorry for Cramer. At the same time, to some of the questions that Stewart was asking, I could’ve given better answers. They were simple financial answers that created the amount of wealth that the world saw and loved.

Again, Cramer wasn’t the best person to handle the questions that Stewart was asking, and Jon made the best use of it

@Guru Panguji You know, if you go back, it all began as comedy. And CNBC chose to take him seriously; Stewart *had* to do this.

Jon Stewart’s questions weren’t that smart, I agree. It was just channeling populist outrage. It had more to do with how financial news networks made it look like the boom would never end and how they pandered to the perpetrators of the bust. Also, Cramer is guilty of manipulating the market (through his hedge fund) even if it was ‘technically legal’.

Yes yes, I do know Cramer was just plain unlucky and I actually enjoy his all out silliness on Mad Money.

The fact is that in a democracy media ought to be an independent body that reports facts and ensures proper functioning of the democracy by equipping people with facts and the people on their part ought to dispassionately analyze these facts and reach/formulate an opinion. Therefore what is required is both an intelligent media and an intelligent populace.

Unfortunately in our country we have a dearth of both – of a well informed and dispassionate media agency and intelligent and rational people. And therefore to blame media is the most stupid thing to do, like Rajdeep Sardesai once said “we deliver what the people demand“ if people want crap they get crap. Ever wondered why IndiaTV and AajTak has a higher TRP rating than NDTV/CNN-IBN?

Media is a business institution afterall.

For one, Jon asked questions that were rather unanswerable in short snippets. For another, CNBC’s audience is not Joe the plumber — it is Wall St. One but has to see the ads on CNBC to get this. At the end of the day, Jon and his ilk didn’t talk about this, either. I didn’t see Taleb, Soros, Roubini or countless others who’ve been talking about this on Jon’s show for the five years that people have been talking about this coming. Of course, that could be because Jon was busy making fart noises. Perhaps he should stick to it.

Not that Cramer is any better, but expecting a for profit TV channel to be socially responsible is laughable at best. Perhaps Jon should donate all his wealth too, in the spirit of social responsibility.