The right stuff

We were reminded of just how weirdly politicized business journalism has become when we tuned into CNBC on March 31 and found lefty blogstress Arianna Huffington guest-hosting "Squawk Box," the network's two-hour morning gabfest.

As Huffington chatted happily with her handpicked guests -- doomsday prognosticators and crisis media darlings Nouriel Roubini and Nassim Taleb, among them -- the blogosphere noted that CNBC had bent, at least a little, to its growing chorus of critics, who, in the aftermath of Jon Stewart's takedown of Jim Cramer last month, implored the cable network "to hire some new economic voices -- people who have a track record of being right about the economic crisis and holding Wall Street executives' feet to the fire."

The request came in the form of an online petition ­(fixcnbc.com) orchestrated by a group of self-described progressives, liberal bloggers and media watchdogs including, to name just a few: Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research; Markos Moulitsas of DailyKos.com; Eric Alterman, a journalism professor at Brooklyn College and City University of New York and a senior fellow for the Center for American Progress; and Eric Burns, president of Media Matters for America, which recently launched Financial Media Matters, a Web site that "will focus extensively on ensuring that outlets such as CNBC, Fox Business Network, and The Wall Street Journal are held accountable." (How it came up with those three, it didn't say.)

By the end of March, nearly 21,000 people had signed the petition, which urges CNBC to stop doing "PR for Wall Street" and start practicing "strong, watchdog journalism -- asking Wall Street tough questions, debunking lies and reporting the truth."

Got that, CNBC?

Far be it for us to defend the network, which we think of as a strange blend of "Access Hollywood" meets CNN meets "The Today Show" for the day-trading set -- it's more entertainment than news; more stock picks than actual business or finance. But as we watch everyone (at least on the left) beat up on the network, we can't help but wonder why critics are specifically targeting CNBC above other media outlets. The most obvious answer is Jon Stewart, of course, but what he so skillfully eviscerated that night wasn't just the sweating Cramer and his cheerleading CNBC colleagues, but the very idea that everyone could and should play the market; that armed with the right information, you, too, poor worker, can invest like a pro. And that's a belief that's promulgated not only by CNBC and Cramer, but by the entire personal finance press, from glossies like Money, Smart Money and Kiplinger's to Web sites such as the Motley Fool and MarketWatch.com and Cramer's own TheStreet.com to the so-called business sections of scores of local newspapers.

Still, it's mostly CNBC that's come in for a drubbing, perhaps because it commands hours of airtime and its anchors and on-air reporters enjoy near-celebrity status. Interestingly, CNBC's critics aren't simply urging people not to watch the network -- their Web site isn't BoycottCNBC.com -- but to fix it, or better yet, to help program its talent and guests. The whole idea of hiring "economic voices" who "have a track record of being right" about our current crisis is particularly curious. Who, exactly, would make that vaunted list? Taleb and Roubini, to be sure, and then usual suspects like Meredith Whitney, Dick Bove and Mike Mayo (all of whom have appeared on CNBC).

But who else? What exactly would be the criteria for "being right"? How far in advance would a "voice" have to have made his or her doomsday call in order to qualify? Would perennial bears like James Grant make the cut? Would short-sellers? What would their role at the network be? Would it be to make sure that the network's content is laced with an appropriate level of doom and gloom? Or is it to make it more progressive?

This all raises the problem that when it comes to economic predictions, past performance does not guarantee future success; today's feted prophets of doom can be tomorrow's one-hit wonders. (See Garzarelli, Elaine.) But there's a larger problem. CNBC can book the greatest economists in the world and still not help the average Joe make money in the market -- a place made for pros. Fix CNBC? Why bother? Maybe the best advice is to ignore CNBC. You don't need a petition to know you shouldn't be getting investment tips from television.

Yvette Kantrow is executive editor of The Deal.