An Open Invitation to NBC's Erin Burnett

This morning, at the Huffington Post, I posted this piece: "NBC Has An Erin Burnett Problem."

I made the case that on Sunday's Meet The Press Burnett repeated pro-Wall Street talking points over and over again and implied that the public's anger over recent corporate abuse was silly or a result of ignorance. I attributed her skewed analysis to the fact that she's "embedded" on Wall Street, dependent on Wall Street executives for access on a day-to-day basis and therefore overly-primed with their talking points.

Well, Erin Burnett heard this critique -- as did CNBC's Jim Cramer -- and they addressed it on the air. To her credit, Erin also wrote me a respectful email, one that I won't share publicly. But to summarize, she disagreed with me. She also said on the air that I didn't reach out to her before writing at the Huffington Post, which would have been a show of good faith dialogue. That's actually not correct -- I emailed her last night and did not receive a response.

I responded to her email in what I hope was a constructive way. In addition laying out my critique of her Meet The Press performance, rooting for her future analysis to improve, and promising kudos if it does, I invited Erin to liveblog with me and the public at the Huffington Post. I did this in the interest of open dialogue about the very real economic issues and journalism issues at hand -- the dialogue she thought would be a show of good faith.

We'll see what she says. The invitation's open, and judging by the comments to my post this morning, she has some fans among Huffington Post readers as well as critics. So, it would be an interesting discussion.

In case you missed it, here's the video I posted this morning, followed by the on-air response--what do you think?

Erin Burnett on Meet The Press:

Jim Cramer Defends Erin Burnett (and, ahem, calls me a "bozo"...thanks, Jim):

P.S. If you're a bold progressive, feel free to stay in the loop with the Progressive Change Campaign Committee. I actually didn't write this post in my capacity as co-founder of that group, buy hey -- free plug.

Comments

[susie1776]

I watched Erin Burnett on CNBC this morning talking about President Obama's move to cap the pay of Wall Street execs at $500,000 if receiving TARP funds. I wanted to reach through my TV and SLAP HER SILLY! She kept insisting that some of his comments were secretly SOCIALIST even while both men disagreed and they felt this was no time to be rewarding failure with big bonuses. This woman hasn't seen a minimum wage job in a looooong time. She's part of the reason many Americans despise Wall Street at the moment. She needs to come out of her ivory tower and take a look at real people for whom a JOB, any JOB would be a blessing. We are not just numbers, lady. Why should some Wall Street banker get rewarded for running his company into the ground???

[Adam Green - Huffpost Blogger]

Amen.

[katielady]

The Moneyhoney, Burnett, Haines et al, as well as any of the Wall Street Ceos are never, NEVER, NEVER going to debate... They studied 'bait and switch' economics... they use printed figures, not REAL MONEY! I wouldn't follow any of their advice...

[Newzieart]

Hi Adam,

I was looking through the Huffington Post site about other Erin Burnett posts and came across this one. You may already know about it, but I thought it's an interesting FYI. At least Cramer didn't call you: "The Worst Person In The World!"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/24/lorrie-lynch-keith-olberm_n_98373.html

On a related note, what do you think of NBC's corporate umbrella of trying to please all factions of political persuasions? MSNBC has been called the Obama channel while CNBC openly criticizes Democratic fiscal / budget policiess. Having Burnett show up on a mainstream and venerable program like Meet The Press was a train wreck waiting to happen. NBC execs were definitely asleep at the switch with letting her on.

[Jesse Strauss]

Its also interesting that Burnett’s defense of Wall Street bonuses ignores a fundamental precept of compensation: in a healthy economy where companies need to compete for talent, if a company doesn’t pay people what they think they are worth, they leave and they company losses value. Typically, that’s bad for shareholders. But the usual justification of “we need to pay so people don’t go to another company” is economically unprincipled in a weak economy becuase there is simply no where a disgruntled Wall Streeter can go to earn more (Yes, yes, it would be nice if something useful, like teaching or science or blogging paid more, but thats not the world we live in). Said another way, Wall Street preaches the genius of the market to create efficiencies ("all things being equal, the market pays people what they are worth: regulations and labor protections just get in the way.") But when applied to them – when they need to live or die by market principals – those go out the window in the interest of self preservation ("we work on Wall Street, we get paid whether we do a good job or bad job"). Has there ever been a less principled group of people? Has Burnett been captured? The answer to both questions is unequivocally YES. Disgusting.

[tompoe]

All discussion from journalists need to start at the beginning. The banks refuse to inform the public where the public monies have gone. Using the phrase, "too complicated" automatically disqualifies Burnett from further reporting. She is truly a member of the judy miller club, and needs to take her shtick to the carnival circuit.

[joehunt]

Adam,

Great piece. It's also worth pointing out how embedded and irresponsible Dennis Kneale is on CNBC. In his tired defense of Wall Street's entitlement and greed I grew irate when he irresponsibly mischaracterized President Obama's comments as anti-capitalism and anti-profit making. That couldn't be further from the truth. Obama has no problem with folks making money; no reasonable person does. What's unreasonable is to expect to make money when you're right and make money when you're wrong, all at the taxpayer's expense, while so many others suffer direct and collateral damage. The CNBC crew keep talking about the innocent average Joe inside these financial institutions who earns a salary and bonus, and who played no part (or a small part) in the financial devastation we're all dealing with. I'm sorry, but the folks in these financial institutions, from CEO all the way down to average Joe have to sacrifice with everyone else.

While Dennis Kneale, Erin, Kudlow and the rest all come to the defense of the average Joe's inside the financial instiutions, their hollow cries make me wonder how come they don't feel for all the folks around the counrty who aren't getting bonuses or worse, have been laid off by their companies as a result of the mistakes made by the financial institutions? It simply isn't fair that these financial folks (average Joe included) keep their jobs, get bonuses even, while so many truly innocent bystanders actually suffered from their mistakes.

[althusius]

NBC has an Erin Burnett problem. What does this really mean? Was Erin Burnett hired by CNBC to look cute and giggle at 'on air' humor? Is this like Rupert Murdoch and Fox News run amok? Is it all about the ratings?

[Joe Bayen]

Nothing wrong with trying to" explain" but it's the "Populism" argument which made the so-called "explanation" biased..

[Joe Bayen]

Nothing wrong with trying to" explain" but it's the "Populism" argument created the bias "explanation".

[wiseguy77]

Ms.Burnett might be somewhat more credible - not much but somewhat - if she didn't have as an expert on her show the lamentable Steve Forbes - charter member of the lucky sperm club - a flat tax fool who has been giving the worst advice to America since his flamboyant but perceptive father Malcom died. A better choice of guests and a less patronizing air (and in Forbes case heir) might give the lady more credibility. I'll grant you she's good looking, but she simply chants the Wall Street party line - an apologist for the outrages that have left our country decimated. There's got to be someone who is both good looking and compassionate who can deliver the financial news. I sense a real heartlessness in this woman, wed to a smugness, making her one of the most disagreeable talking heads on TV.

[usedtowander]

Upon review her discussion is more troubling than I originally thought.
I think she unknowingly broke some news.
Apparently, at these banks, cash deposits are not debited to cash. Those deposits are kept in a separate "pool."
Does that mean that these banks have a separate set of books - one they use internally and one they show the government? If so, I wonder what other troubling things are on their balance sheets and what other troubling accounting practices they have.

Apparently, in these banks, cash paid out comes from some special cash accounts. That's pretty odd.

So, when we give these banks cash, and they pay it out it's from "special" accounts. I guess the banks don't add up their cash. They just keep "special" books.

We all get the concept of bonuses as compensation. But, in well-run companies, compensation is tied to shareholder return performance. These banks lost something like two-thirds of their value - astoundingly poor performance. Yet, they paid out billions in "bonuses."

What can we learn from this? Well, compensation in these companies is set by management. Good compensation policies are a sign of good management. Compensation, should be, at least theoretically, tied to performance. But it wasn't tied to corporate performance - because, if it was, there could not be bonuses. So, we can infer that compensation policies were badly created. And, from that we can infer that management is incompetent. But, since they lost 2/3s of value, that's redundant.

[westbrooks01]

Whenever anyone who is tasked with talking about money says "it's too complicated" to understand, you should immediately close your pocketbooks and ears. When it becomes too complicated to understand, you weren't meant to understand it, while they take off with your money.

Yesterday, on MTP, when I heard Erin start talking about pools and complication, I seriously started laughing, because I knew, at that point, she was part of the Wall Street subterfuge.

Erin, you're in a position of privilege, take control of your information and your place at the table.

[1flower]

Here, Here, I may be to dumb to understand it, but I sure know when I am hearing some bunk. Erin B was slinging plenty of it. And I wish someone would just say shut up to Jim Cramer. Liar, Liar, pants on fire to all of the apologist and any one who utters the word they're socialist.