What’s important to remember is that guys like Cramer and Santelli are just like actors filling a role on TV. They may have high visibility roles but they are replacable just like any other actor. The point of the interview was not about good calls versus bad calls. It was not about Cramer the individual or any other individual that claims to be an expert on CNBC. The main premise of the interview was to ask what the nature of the roles on CNBC are. Are they financial news reporters? Are they consumer advocates? Or are they cogs in the wall street PR machine?
Suppose I interviewed David Lereah and focused on all the predictions he got wrong. I could certainly make him look an idiot. People could easily come to the conclusion that he’s a moron – End of story. I’m sure people would be relieved to learn that he was replaced by Lawrence Yun. With Lawrence Yun in charge, everyone can expect better predictions by the NAR, right?
The problem is that Lereah and Yun are indistiguishable from each other. They are both playing the same role. Unless you understand what that role is, you won’t understand why Lereah made such bad predictions. More importantly, won’t understand why Yun will be just as unreliable.
