Category: on TV

remarks about TV, both the what and why

The * Effect

Posted on Posted in econocaste, on TV

In research there are techniques for measuring small influences. For several years it is easier to detect the effect of a “source of data” on the resulting qualitative measures of a population. After several “duplications” the original source is lost. The opinion may remain, unverifiable but trusted by easy reproduction. For those of you familiar with the innards of the DOT COM build out, you are familiar with the estimates of rapid growth that originated inside a tech support department.

These effects are most pronounced when the topic is numeric. The effect of a “trusted expert” is most apparent when reviewing media depiction of crisis, such as over the past year.

In an economic, a money based society, the presence of apparent wealth marks you as important, perhaps knowledgeable. Money draws followers unwilling to question.

Attention Span

Posted on Posted in on TV

Fast Money in DC. Notice what they notice, to know who they are, how they pretend over things.

The Bush Administration put into place penalties that won’t kick in until five years from now. This is little encouragement for immediate action from the banks, yet not a peep, though it is a direct reason for the continuing market inaction.

We want the market to work…

On comes the future administration. Not good enough that they say they cannot say since they are not able to enact. Why not ask them what they intend to do with the Fourth Armored over the next couple of months? Or perhaps that is too opaque? Instead you opine that you too love puppies and hate recession and layoffs.

Then what are you doing over the next seventy five days? It certainly would be fair to strike back at me, since your statement is a variation of one that I’ve used at several firms about prospective employees’ responses during their interview. It would be fair, but late, perhaps even lifted.

Now for the puppies on the net. The current administration has set up a motive to delay action by the banks for up to five years. That means through the next (Obama) administration, thereby making possible an ouster at the next election. Further, the Fourth Armored can not be sent by Obama into action without it being part of a coups! What makes you think he can enforce executive orders over the Treasury or SEC or whatever now, without that also being a coups? Of course I am all for a Molotov cocktail, just not on an empty stomach.