ThinkProgress Logo

Stories tagged with “CNBC

Economy

How CNBC And Fox News Misinformed Viewers About The Dangers Of The Debt Ceiling

House Republicans recently agreed to raise the debt ceiling, preventing a self-inflicted economic calamity. Experts agree that failure to raise the debt ceiling would have catastrophic consequences for the U.S. economy. The debt ceiling debacle of 2010, during which the U.S. did not actually breach the debt limit and default, will wind up costing U.S. taxpayers $18.9 billion and one million jobs.

But television watchers going to CNBC, Fox News, or Fox Business for their news may not know just how dangerous a weaponized debt ceiling really is. As Media Matters’ Alan Pyke showed, those networks were very likely to discuss the debt ceiling without noting the negative effects that breaching it might have:

Only 100 segments out of 273 mentioned the negative economic effects of failing to raise — or threat of failing to raise — the debt ceiling. MSNBC most frequently mentioned negative effects in 41 of 68 segments (60 percent), while CNN mentioned them in 13 of 23 segments (57 percent). The remaining networks lagged far behind, with CNBC, Fox Business, and Fox News mentioning macroeconomic consequences in 26, 23, and 25 percent of segments, respectively.

The debt ceiling, of course, hasn’t gone away, and will need to be dealt with again in May. Economists largely agree that the debt ceiling should be abolished.

Economy

CNBC Blames Random Market Fluctuation On Democratic Congressman

CNBC seems to be engaging in the market equivalent of a Rorschach test. On Tuesday, the NBC-owned network tried to extrapolate meaning from a random market fluctuation, concluding that the appearance of one of their guests — a progressive Democrat — prompted a drop in stock values.

Host Michelle Caruso-Cabrera leapt to the conclusion that Rep. Raul Grijalva’s (D-AZ) appearance caused the Dow Jones Industrial to drop by 89.24 points, well within average fluctuations. “As we’re talking the market is selling off once again,” she told him:

GRIJALVA: The middle ground is a fair share. And if by putting the earned benefit programs on the table — Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid — as being the source for the deficit and the only way to reduce that and the only way to balance this, I think it’s wrong when there is no significant revenue. Not just gestures or token appeals about tax deductions and other areas, but a significant restructuring of that code to bring us back in line the way that we were under Clinton.

CARUS-CABRERA: Representative? You know what, as we’re talking, the market is selling off once again. Every time members of Congress come on — and I’ve got to tell you sir, I think you’re contributing to the fears that we’re going off the fiscal cliff, because it doesn’t sound like there’s any compromise in what you’re saying — do you care that markets are selling off dramatically when it looks like you guys can’t come to a deal?

Watch it:

The network’s confused attempts to tie the stock market to fiscal talks have worked in both directions; today, it constructed a narrative around a rise in stocks as a “struggle” that came about despite a generally negative outlook on the talks from both Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH).

Alyssa

Why NBC Should Fire Donald Trump

NBCUniversal has a relationship with Donald Trump, the long-time performance artist and host of its NBC reality competition show The Apprentice, that’s strikingly similar to the one between the Donald and the Romney campaign McKay Coppins described in one of what will be one of many post-mortems of the campaign:

Among the savvy sophisticates who populated the campaign headquarters in Boston, Trump was viewed as a joke and a blowhard — an outrageous figure whose fixation on Obama’s birth certificate was, at once, bizarre and off-putting, according to campaign sources. But he was also popular among the very voters Romney was most concerned about winning over. And the candidate’s aides believed — perhaps naively — that if they could win his endorsement, they might be able to win the hearts of his many conservative fans. “He played very well with blue-collar-type Republicans, and the campaign saw that,” said one source in Trump’s camp. “If you have no education, and you work with your hands, you like him. It’s like, ‘Wow, if I was rich, that’s how I would live!’ The girls, the cars, the fancy suits. His ostentatiousness is appealing to them.”

For NBC, The Apprentice is a product similar to a Trump political endorsement. It’s relatively cheap to buy, in part because it’s heavily supported by product placement. It channels the things that make Trump irritating, his presumptions of expertise, his abrasiveness, and his showman’s flair, towards reasonably amusing targets. And in its Celebrity Apprentice iteration, the show pulls in stars with their own followings. For this, Trump got a $130 million contract from NBC last year. But NBC handed down that deal to Trump at the end of an awful year for the network. And now that the ratings landscape–and the political one–are very different, NBC should seriously consider if they want to stay in business with Trump, or if both he and The Apprentice have reached the end of their usefulness.

The Apprentice is probably near the end of its natural lifespan as a show anyway. Its celebrity editions are drawing fewer than 9 million viewers per episode, a figure that isn’t bad, but also isn’t strong enough to use to launch other new shows. And it pales in comparison to The Voice, which both has given NBC a platform to boost freshman success stories like Revolution and Go On, and provides an alternate revenue stream to the network in the form of music sales. As NBC solidifies its revitalized brand, and as non-musical competition shows increasingly show their age, the network should consider Trump and The Apprentice both in the context of the larger primetime environment and with an eye towards the special headaches Trump brings in his wake.
Read more

Security

CNBC Host Accuses Obama Of Manipulating Libya Facts To Cut Military Spending

Maria Bartiromo.

It’s no secret that the American right believes that President Obama refused to call the Benghazi attack “terrorism” for political purposes even after Candy Crowley debunked the meme on national TV during the presidential debate. But CNBC host Maria Bartiromo took the meme to a whole new level today, accusing the President of attempting to drum up support for cuts to military spending at home — an assertion which her guest, Senator John McCain (R-AZ), pivoted off of rather than challenged:

BARTIROMO: Senator, I don’t understand. This whole Benghazi story boggles the mind. I mean, It was September 11th. The embassies were burned, our ambassador was murdered. The Wall Street Journal reported that the CIA told the President for ten days in his daily briefings that we could see an attack on the U.S. consulate and there was [sic] the result of protests. Why would the President not call it out for what it was on day one? Why wait so long to tell the American people that it was a terrorist attack? Is it to justify defense cuts? To make everybody believe since bin Laden is dead, everything’s quiet on the home front? I don’t even understand why the President of the United States would not call it what it was from day one.

MCCAIN: I think primarily it was this narrative that the President has been saying for so long that he got bin Laden, which we all appreciate, but then that al-Qaeda is on the run.

Watch it:

Bartiromo’s framing answers her own question (and refutes McCain’s response): aside from three clear references to “acts of terror” directly after the attack, the reason Obama wasn’t out front blaming al-Qaeda or another group was because, as Bartiromo notes, the CIA was telling him it was the video and that there’s scant evidence al-Qaeda was responsible.

President Obama’s plan for military spending is supported by top Pentagon brass, while Governor Romney’s plan ups military expenditures by an unnecessary and unpaid-for $2.1 trillion.

Economy

CNBC Host Repeatedly Asks Labor Secretary If She Cooked Jobs Report For Obama

Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis went on CNBC Friday morning to discuss today’s strong jobs report, which found unemployment falling to 7.8 percent. However, one host, Carl Quintanilla, was more interested in talking about the conspiracy theorists who claim the Bureau of Labor Statistic is fixing the jobs report to help President Obama win the election.

Quintanilla insisted on asking Solis to defend the BLS against conspiracy charges three separate times during the interview. When Solis attempted to turn the conversation to a more substantive discussion, Quintanilla asked her to respond to former GE CEO Jack Welch, who tweeted that Obama cooked the jobs report to distract from the presidential debate. The CNBC host praised Welch, who was caught manipulating GE’s accounting data as CEO, as someone who “knows a bit about how economic data is created”:

QUINTANILLA: A lot of people do not believe the 7.8 number. They believe that somehow BLS fixed this to coincide with the election cycle. What is Labor’s response?
SOLIS: I’m insulted when I hear that. Because we have a very professional civil service organization, where you have top top economists at work at the BLS. They’ve been doing these calculations, these are our best trained and best skilled individuals working at the BLS. It’s really ludicrous to hear that kind of statement. [...]

QUINTANILLA: We can go through all the talking points we do every month, Madame Secretary. Congress needs to do more, but I want to read you one tweet from Jack Welch who used to run General Electric, a man who I think most people would argue knows a bit about how economic data is created…what do you say to him?
SOLIS: I would say I have the highest regard for our professionals who do the calculations in the BLS. They are highly skilled economists trained in this area.

Watch it:

At the end of the interview, Quintanilla interjected to insist that “large sections of the country don’t believe the data.”

Alyssa

Why ‘Smash’ Doesn’t Work—And What NBC Needs to Learn From It

I very much wanted to like Smash, NBC’s show about the making of a Broadway musical, and not just because I’m eager for the generally well-intentioned network to be repaid for Parks and Recreation and Community with some huge commercial successes. I’m interested in people’s artistic processes, and I adore Anjelica Huston and Debra Messing, who star as the show’s book writer and producer, respectively. But the show isn’t drawing the kind of numbers NBC would have hoped for, particularly for a show they would have loved to monetize the way Fox has turned Glee into a cash cow, with iTunes sales and a spin-off live show. And it’s not really working creatively, either.

Perhaps the central problem of Smash is that it’s predicated on a rivalry that the show is contorting itself to make plausible. There’s no question that Ivy (Megan Hilty) deserves the lead in the Marilyn musical under development over Karen (Katherine McPhee): she’s a more polished Broadway singer, a more accomplished dancer, she has much more experience on the stage, she’s a physical match for Marilyn, and she’s a more dedicated professional. So how does Smash make it seem like an emotionally engaged contest? By making Ivy a shallow bitch. While we get Karen’s home life with her devoted boyfriend and trips home to her friends and supportive family in Iowa, Ivy gets a single phone call home, where it’s clear that things aren’t all right, but we never get any details. Even though she’s clearly more qualified, we’re told Ivy only really gets the part because she slept with Derek, the director, a convenient drama-driving plot device that also happens to reduce a talented performer. Now that we’re in rehearsals, we see Ivy pushing Karen (now a member of the chorus) to the side, even though she’s not exactly doing her job. It’s contrived and irritating.

Then, there’s the show-within-a-show itself. The characters talk endlessly about Marilyn Monroe without revealing anything particularly interesting about her character. The numbers themselves are charming, but ultimately light—maybe it’s just me, but I’m not particularly moved by a faux Marilyn cooing about manipulating men with her sex appeal. The show tells us, rather than shows us, that these artists are having profound experiences with the material—though it does a nice job of showing us how sexy artists can be to non-artists when they’re in their zones.

And I wonder if that combination of material and setting is what’s preventing Smash from becoming the grown-up version of Glee—and would prevent it from being that show even if everything else was clicking. Glee is a hot mess these days, but it can be genuinely daring and moving when it takes on the subject of gay teenagers. But it does so in a setting where everything else is familiar: this is a small town populated with relatively familiar archetypes, the students attend an essentially typical high school, and they’re singing songs almost everyone in the viewing audience has heard before. The gay characters are a minority in a largely straight world. It’s a show that is sometimes about tolerance, and asking to do that from a very safe space for straight, middle-American viewers.

Smash, on the other hand, is asking viewers to come into a world where women and straight men are dominant, framed by music that’s original rather than familiar. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that, per se—shows shouldn’t have to star straight dudes to be successful. But I do think that it might be a sign of NBC’s unwillingness or inability to accept that it’s going to have to make some genuinely popular entertainment to score a smash hit. What makes Glee easy to consume isn’t just the renditions of popular hits—it’s the setting. It’s not actually a natural sege from the cover extravaganza that is The Voice and its quartet of judges who represent the full spectrum of the music business to a show about the making of a Broadway musical.

NBC needs to recognize the difference between the two and decide what kind of entertainment it wants to make. If it’s going to make quirky shows or shows that imply that rivals like Glee aren’t grown-up enough, NBC may be consigning itself to a smaller but wealthier group of viewers who are desirable to advertisers. But if it’s going to make big, mass entertainment that it endeavors to make somewhat smarter than its competitors offerings, it needs to do so without giving the impression that it resents having to do it.

Alyssa

The Best and Worst Trends from NBC’s Presentations at #TCA12

First day of press tour is done, and tomorrow I dive into the waters of MSNBC, Bravo, and SyFy. More to come, but here were the best and worst trends from NBC’s presentations today:

Worst: Big Scary Lesbians. NBC has two pilots where plots appear to be motivated by the presence of outsized, aggressive lesbians. After her lovely work on Glee, Dot Jones deserves far better than to be cast as a butch lesbian who sexually harasses Laura Prepon while they’re both in lockup on Are You There, Chelsea? And the heavy lesbian contractor who gets passed over in favor of a hottie love interest for the main character on Bent manages to simultaneously reinforce stereotypes about lesbians, and about women and home improvement.

Best: Support for Working Mothers. Amanda Peet mentioned at the Bent panel that NBC had been wonderful about accommodating and supporting her being a working mother during production of the show. Debra Messing says of her character on Smash, “The hero’s a woman who is very passionate about her creative life and needs that part of her life fulfilled, but also is a proud mother who has that home life and wants that part of her life fulfilled. The way Theresa writes, there’s such richness.” Not that we need aggressive emphasis of characters HAVING IT ALL constantly, but it’s nice to hear that the network practices off-set some of the better things it preaches on-screen.

Worst: Uncertainty. Bob Greenblatt doesn’t know when Community‘s coming back. No one knows when Awake will air. Scheduling’s not easy, we know, but stop torturing us here.

Meh: Alcohol: It sounds like the drinking on Are You There, Chelsea? will get tired quickly, but J.B. Smoove as an addict in recovery? That could be intriguing territory. Television’s got a lot of serious drinkers, but fewer people showing us what it’s like to live in a world where most people treat drinking as if it ranges from no big deal to the linchpin of their social lives.

Best: A lack of sniping. NBC may have to fight its way back to the top, but the network seems aware that it’s not close enough to its rivals to tear them down. The folks behind Smash acknowledge that Glee opened the door without slagging anything they don’t like about it. Bob Greenblatt was blunt about the network’s need to find its own way without complaining that his rivals are being wrongly rewarded for less risky programming. When The Voice criticized its rivals, it was on substance and format, which is fair game. NBC’s biggest asset is the fact that people want to like it. It’s clear they have no intention of relinquishing it.

Economy

CNBC Talking Heads: Wall Street Protesters Are ‘Freaks,’ ‘Anti-American,’ ‘Bizarre’

The Occupy Wall Street protest that began in New York City more than three weeks ago has sparked an entire movement, based on the principle that the economy should work for everyone, not simply the richest one percent. At a time when income inequality and corporate profits are running sky high, right alongside joblessness and foreclosures, a movement like this captures the very real pain felt by “the 99 percent.”

However, the financial prognosticators on CNBC — including Larry Kudlow, Jim Cramer, and Joe Kernan — have found nothing but scorn for the protestors, deriding them as “bizarre,” “freaks,” and “law-breaking” “anti-American” “anarchists” who are “more aligned with Lenin.” Watch a compilation:

It’s no real surprise that the same pundits who derided subprime lending victims as “suckers,” vigorously defended the righteousness of bailed-out banks paying million dollar bonuses, believe tax havens prevent tyranny, and cited Glenn Beck as a new economic indicator would find the Wall Street protests off-putting. But their comments merely highlight how out-of-touch they are with the common American, as they cater all day, every day to the Wall Street crowd.

Politics

BREAKING: Eric Cantor Admits That $1 Trillion In War Savings Counted In Ryan Plan, ‘Cut, Cap & Balance’ Plan

Today, Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) rejected Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-NV) plan for raising the debt limit, claiming that it was full of gimmicks. Boehner’s principle criticism was that Reid’s plan counted $1 trillion in savings from winding down the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

In a remarkable interview on CNBC, Majority Leader Eric Cantor admitted to Larry Kudlow that both the House Republican budget and the “Cut, Cap, and Balance” Plan — which were both supported by nearly the entire GOP caucus — also counted savings from winding down the wars:

Cantor: Speaker Boehner came out months ago and said we are not going to increase the debt ceiling unless we have comensurate or even greater cuts in spending. Now Sen. Reid’s plan doesn’t do that. What Sen. Reid’s plan says is we’re going to raise the debt ceiling $2.4 trillion and we are also going to cut spending but what he does is counts over a trillion dollars in spending that is assumed to decrease and go away anyway which is the spending associated with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Kudlow: Yes, but isn’t that in the Paul Ryan baseline also, which is the baseline for Cut, Cap and Balance.

Cantor: But, but, but… absolutely it is.

Watch it:

Kudlow started the interview by posing the following question to Cantor: “What’s so bad about the Harry Reid plan? It looks very Republican to me.”

Media

CNBC Guests And Hosts All Agree Christine O’Donnell’s Victory Is Good News For Wall Street

Today, CNBC aired a segment titled “When it comes to the market, is the Tea Party good news or bad news?” Hugh Johnson of the investment firm Hugh Johnson Advisors and Andy Busch of BMO Capital Markets joined hosts Larry Kudlow, Trish Regan, and Melissa Francis to discuss Republican radical Christine O’Donnell’s Senate primary victory in Delaware.

All the guests and hosts appeared to agree that O’Donnell’s victory was a good thing for Wall Street because she supports policies favorable to the financial industry. Although both guests conceded that O’Donnell’s nomination might be bad for Wall Street because it could enable a Democrat to win the Delaware seat, there was a general consensus that the string of Tea Party victories has sent the right “message” that Americans are drifting to the far right. The talking heads rattled off a variety of Tea Party and O’Donnell positions — like extending the Bush tax cuts for millionaires and opposing regulations — that they agreed with:

REGAN: So when it comes to markets, is the Tea Party and this victory in Delaware good news or bad news?

JOHNSON: You know in a strange sort of way, I think it’s good news because it first of all indicates passion but its passion on the part of the Republican Party. The passion is, we’re kind of tired, we’re fed up with big government and raising taxes. [...]

BUSCH: Well certainly the stance by the Tea Party candidate of a capital gains elimination for two years is wonderful for the markets! I think the central point or the salient point of the victory is not that this candidate is flawed. A lot of candidates are flawed as human beings are. But the point is, there is an energized base that is pulling the conversation this stance of fiscal responsibility but also business-friendly and market-friendly policies. [...]

KUDLOW: I totally agree, and we’re looking at a configured, conservative Congress. We don’t know if Republicans can take the Senate, that’s going to be close. It looks like they’re going to take the House, big time. That’s a conservative Congress. And as Andy said, that’s going to be pro-growth, pro-business, anti-spend, anti-tax views.

Watch it:

Generally, Kudlow and his associates have been proud partisans hoping for a Democratic defeat this November. But O’Donnell’s opponent Rep. Mike Castle’s (R-DE) was one of the few members of the GOP caucus to vote for financial reform. Notably, CNBC’s Kudlow is also a Tea Party movement funder through the attack group Club for Growth.

Older

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up