Jon Stewart interviews Jim Cramer

[RedImperator]

Link to Comedy Central site with entire uncut interview.

For those who have been out of the loop, Jon Stewart and Jim Cramer have been feuding for a few weeks now, ever since the Daily Show took the piss out of CNBC for its rosy predictions right up until the market crashed and its toadying CEO interviews (including one with Sir Allen Stanford, just weeks before his Ponzi scheme collapsed, in which nobody asked how his fund was continuing to "earn" money after everyone else took a bath). Cramer responded by dismissing The Daily Show as a "variety show" in several interviews, and Stewart fired back by airing clips of Cramer giving bad advice. Cramer, to his credit, seemed to finally realize that it's no use picking a fight with a comedian who hosts a fake news show (if you win, you just beat up a comedian, and if you lose, you got your ass kicked by a comedian), and went on the show for an interview.

It was a slaughter. Cramer seemed to think the interview would be about his bad stock picks, and came reasonably prepared for that, but Stewart instead confronted him with a tape of a 2006 interview where Cramer admitted that, as a hedge fund manager, he manipulated stock prices in order to ensure a profit. Stewart used that as a jumping off point to his central thesis: there are two markets, the public one where we're told to invest our pensions for the long term, and a secret one where traders like Cramer move vast amounts of money around to make giant short term profits at the expense of small-time, long-term investors. Cramer and the rest of the CNBC staff know about this secret market, but acted as if it didn't exist, telling people to continue pouring money into a market that was on the verge of collapse.

Cramer didn't know how to respond; he seemed to be replying to questions he expected to get rather than the ones Stewart actually asked. It was a devastating interview, and leaves the viewer, once again, with the question: Why is a comedian the only person in American media actually asking these questions?

[Darth Wong]

I laughed my ass off when I realized that Jon Stewart had an array of "ammunition" clips all cued up and ready to fire off at him. There was a point in the interview when I almost thought Cramer was going to cry.

Why is a comedian the only person in American media actually asking these questions?

Because his employer is the Comedy Network, which can afford to say "fuck you" to the FOXNews viewer demographic because that demographic doesn't watch the Comedy Network anyway.

[Kodiak]

snip
Cramer didn't know how to respond; he seemed to be replying to questions he expected to get rather than the ones Stewart actually asked. It was a devastating interview, and leaves the viewer, once again, with the question: Why is a comedian the only person in American media actually asking these questions?

I couldn't BELIEVE how incredibly serious and professional the interview came-off. I was expecting Stewart to make some jokes and then have an informal discussion about the corruption on Wall Street. What struck me the most is how deafening the silence was from the audience in some parts- this was clearly not a laughing matter to America. Was is a guy who's career consists of 1 movie where he goes to China, 1 movie where he talks about weed, and a fake news show more capable of getting the voice of the common people out on the air than every single news network combined? I think he nailed it when he asked Cramer who his audience was: The guys on Wall Street who trade our money in back rooms, or the people who are capitalizing your adventure. I look forward to watching the extended interview today.

There was a point in the interview when I almost thought Cramer was going to cry.

With the magic of DVR we could frame-by-frame and pinpoint some of the saddest and most terrified faces I've seen on TV in a looooong time. The only unfortunate thing was that Cramer has become "the face of the issue" and a lot of other news personalities are just hiding their heads in the sand.

[Ender]

For those interested, here are the clips of the exchange leading up to this. That interview was just... wow. Cramer came on expecting thing would be a PR stunt, and right about the point where the Apple clips end and Stewart says "This is not a fucking game" he can tell that this isn't one. He gets a look in his eyes like he is staring down the barrel of a loaded gun with no place to run. Crossfire lasted something like 9 weeks after Stewart did his take down, with viewership dropping massively in the wake of him calling them out. I wonder if something similar will happen here. I hope so. Keep in mind that Cramer was caught manipulating the market as a hedge fund manager. The guy has no scruples.

What I'd really like, is to see a big investigation of these talking heads. It would have to be by reporters, because there are no laws about giving monetary advice over the air waves, or even, AFAIK ethical standards for the "industry". But ask yourself a simple question: "If I could make people plunge millions of dollars into certain industries by saying whatever I wanted on air, how would I use that to make the most money for myself?". I would be absolutely shocked if a number of them were not using their shows to try to manipulate things for their own gain.

[Darth Wong]

The talking heads love to use the word "oversight". Unfortunately, they would never admit that they require "oversight" themselves.

[Kodiak]

The talking heads love to use the word "oversight". Unfortunately, they would never admit that they require "oversight" themselves.

One of the best lines from last night was Stewart saying "When you interview these CEO's and they tell you everything is fine while the market is crumbling, do you honestly think you can take their word? Around here we tend to look things up."

Oversight for everyone else, but everyone else makes mistakes

[Knife]

I was talking about this on the local talk radio chat I go to. These clowns are like the football analysts, in that if you watch a game then rewind your tivo back to the start and then watch the pre-game analysis, they have no fucking clue what's going to happen most of the time. The fact that, instead of just a game, these hacks help sell people into giving up millions of dollars into markets puts it to the next level.

I'm sure some of these financial reporters (pfft) are predatory, but I think a healthy chunk of them are just self aggrandizing fucks with no clue. Still, end game is us small folks get it in the ass. I don't watch the Daily show so wasn't aware of this particular little war going on between the two. Truth be known, first time I ever saw Cramer was in Iron man the movie. Funny as fuck to watch the build up and Jon really skewered him face to face and i agree with his assessment about 'two markets'.

[Darth Wong]

Let's put this in another context: suppose these people were handing out half-baked un-researched medical advice willy-nilly on national TV. There would be no question that they should be prosecuted. But when it's "only" financial advice, then it's OK. And yet, we are told that the financial system is soooo important that the government has no choice but to pour trillions of dollars into it. They're having it both ways: they're so important that they need to be bailed out, but they're not so important that they require the kind of regulation that people expect for medicine.

Frankly, every stock picking "analyst" on TV should be required to begin every single episode by publicizing his historical performance record, the same way a mutual fund is required by law to tell every single customer how they've performed in the past.

[Count Chocula]

It would be a shame to see Cramer go; I can't really call him stupid, but I've long despised his "Everyman's Stock Advisor" schtick complete with rolled-up sleeves, Sarin dose bug-eyes, and manic yelling and waving of arms and smashing of random objects.

I say it would be a shame because he's been a very reliable contrarian windsock. The more wound-up OMFG hot he got for a particular stock or sector, the more I knew it was time to sell. Going counter to his advice (back before he had Mad Money) was one factor in my exiting tech stocks in 1999 and watching the fireworks from the sidelines.

And yeah, Stewart makes him look like a complete mendacious ass - at best.

[Civil War Man]

There was a point in the interview when I almost thought Cramer was going to cry.

I'm glad it wasn't just me who noticed this.

Strangely enough, I think Jon Stewart's position as a joke commentator for a basic cable comedy network makes him well suited for doing stuff like this, because people somehow don't expect it after so many are burned.

Cramer came in expecting a schoolyard tussle, and then realized that he brought fists to a gunfight.

[Pablo Sanchez]

Frankly, every stock picking "analyst" on TV should be required to begin every single episode by publicizing his historical performance record, the same way a mutual fund is required by law to tell every single customer how they've performed in the past.

I think that this is what the (in)famous Santelli Moment on CNBC was really about. The millions of Americans who took on mortgages they couldn't afford were in a sense passive participants reacting to a financial bubble constructed by people who ostensibly should have known better. The housing market was aggressively promoted not only by the traditional sources of financial advice like banking authorities and the money media, but even by entertainment networks like The Learning Channel et al., which ran a shit-ton of "house-flipping" shows that were essentially an advertisement for high-risk real-estate ventures (Look at this guy making $50,000 in two weeks by flipping a house! ANYBODY CAN DO IT!). Santelli's "losers" were reacting to an atmosphere of irrational exuberance; I think they share some blame, but only as much as anybody else who was taken in by hustle.

I mean, look at the people who got taken in by the Stanford or Madoff Ponzi schemes; many of them were supposed to be really wise economic heavyweights. But you could go to Stateville and grab a couple of Chicago Outfit goombahs with third-grade educations, and they would have smelled the rat five minutes into a meeting with Madoff. I mean, the guy was promising 50% returns and wouldn't even hand over a vague outline of how he was doing it.

So I think the rage and fear of the stockpickers and financial analysts comes from the collapse of faith in their expertise and capacity to run the economy, because the logical next move for Americans is to make sure the "smart" financial gurus will never be allowed to do this again. This is already looking like the end of huge CEO payoffs, and at some point we might get official government action to dissolve what Stewart called the dual-market system, which puts a lot of people like Santelli out of their cushy jobs.

[Vendetta]

I couldn't BELIEVE how incredibly serious and professional the interview came-off. I was expecting Stewart to make some jokes and then have an informal discussion about the corruption on Wall Street..

I think that's what Cramer was expecting. Stewart pulled him in for the first few minutes then started hammering him. It was a treasure of journalistic interviewing.

[SAMAS]

Imagine, if you will, a kingdom being victimized by a dragon. The soldiers and the knights all seem to be afraid of it.

One day, some time into the ordeal, the Court Jester decides to cheer the king up with a play, about slaying the dragon.

As the play is underway, the king goes slack-jawed as he realizes that the Dragon-mask the Jester is using was made from the dragon's head.

That's kind of the feeling I got watching Jon during this whole thing.

[Alan Bolte]

But you could go to Stateville and grab a couple of Chicago Outfit goombahs with third-grade educations, and they would have smelled the rat five minutes into a meeting with Madoff. I mean, the guy was promising 50% returns and wouldn't even hand over a vague outline of how he was doing it.

Um, he was? I thought what was so effective about Madoff was that he only promised %10, but still came through with those returns when everyone else was losing money.

[KrauserKrauser]

I heard it was more like 2% a month, every month without fail for a 24% annual gain.

[Ender]

I think that this is what the (in)famous Santelli Moment on CNBC was really about. The millions of Americans who took on mortgages they couldn't afford were in a sense passive participants reacting to a financial bubble constructed by people who ostensibly should have known better. The housing market was aggressively promoted not only by the traditional sources of financial advice like banking authorities and the money media, but even by entertainment networks like The Learning Channel et al., which ran a shit-ton of "house-flipping" shows that were essentially an advertisement for high-risk real-estate ventures (Look at this guy making $50,000 in two weeks by flipping a house! ANYBODY CAN DO IT!). Santelli's "losers" were reacting to an atmosphere of irrational exuberance; I think they share some blame, but only as much as anybody else who was taken in by hustle.

Nope. Santelli's rant and such has nothing to do with all that. Santelli's rant was because he was paid to make that rant. A couple of bloggers who usually work for Playboy investigated. Follow the money and connections, and GOP backers have been laying the ground work for a fake grass roots opposition for months. This and the rest of the manufactured outrage are about as real as the bodies of the girls these guys usually write for.

[SCRawl]

I have to say that at the end of the first segment, during which Stewart was making with the "nice nice", I was disappointed. I had expected some minor fireworks, and was a little irked that I wasn't going to get them. I assumed that Stewart was just too chicken to call Cramer out face to face. Something struck me as odd, though: the interview started in the first segment, which traditionally was just a recap of the news of the day.

By the end of the second segment, Stewart had already exceeded my expectations. He stuck it to Cramer in a way I never thought he would. It both scares and impresses the hell out of me that Jon Stewart might be the only guy (with a voice) out there who will hold Cramer's feet to the fire, and he's not even a real journalist.

[Terralthra]

I heard it was more like 2% a month, every month without fail for a 24% annual gain.

Compound interest. 1.02^12 = 1.268. 26.8% yearly.

[Elfdart]

I was talking about this on the local talk radio chat I go to. These clowns are like the football analysts, in that if you watch a game then rewind your tivo back to the start and then watch the pre-game analysis, they have no fucking clue what's going to happen most of the time. The fact that, instead of just a game, these hacks help sell people into giving up millions of dollars into markets puts it to the next level.

I'm sure some of these financial reporters (pfft) are predatory, but I think a healthy chunk of them are just self aggrandizing fucks with no clue. Still, end game is us small folks get it in the ass. I don't watch the Daily show so wasn't aware of this particular little war going on between the two. Truth be known, first time I ever saw Cramer was in Iron man the movie. Funny as fuck to watch the build up and Jon really skewered him face to face and i agree with his assessment about 'two markets'.

I've always considered the stock market to be little more than a glorified racetrack where people gamble and place side bets. I gave it too much credit, since this track has fixed races, doped up horses and other mischief. Oh, and people look at Wall Street as a trustworthy institution, no matter how fucked up it really is. I wouldn't be surprised if a track or gambling hall has tougher scrutiny, since they can't afford to have people think their games are fixed, even with the entertainment value.

[aerius]

I'd say the market is more like 3-card Monte these days than anything else. Suck'em in, take their money, and give them a good kick in the nuts for completeness. Cramer's one of the shills in the game, with the dealers being the big banker guys who are taking your money and laughing all the way.

[The Romulan Republic]

Stewart can certainly pull a serious interview if he wants to. I vaguely recall a period during the last election where he was the only news guy I could think of who'd I'd ever seen ask John McCain a tough question. Well, maybe not, but I respect the guy as a serious interviewer, as well as a comedian.

[Pablo Sanchez]

Um, he was? I thought what was so effective about Madoff was that he only promised %10, but still came through with those returns when everyone else was losing money.

I was going from the annual return but also exaggerating for effect, sorry. The returns he offered were high but not impossibly so, and he always made money without regard to the economic situation, even while other companies that made investments in the exact same fashion that he (vaguely) described using were losing their shirts. My point was that his investors really should have known better, because he was selling them results that were impossible on their face and refusing to really explain the mechanism for them--classic traits of a con game.

Nope. Santelli's rant and such has nothing to do with all that. Santelli's rant was because he was paid to make that rant. A couple of bloggers who usually work for Playboy investigated. Follow the money and connections, and GOP backers have been laying the ground work for a fake grass roots opposition for months. This and the rest of the manufactured outrage are about as real as the bodies of the girls these guys usually write for.

Really? I'm fascinated to find this out, and I guess I'm establishing a record of overestimating people like these!

[Minischoles]

Wow he really suckered Cramer in, nice and comedic during that first section then just pummeled him for the rest of the segment, Cramer really did look completely lost as to what to say sometimes, seeing Stewart do a complete 180 like that.

[Imperial Overlord]

So our most effective media watchdogs when it comes to financial shenanigans are a comedian and soft core porn. I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

[hongi]

I was really quite disgusted at how Cramer kept trying to agree with Stewart, made those little unfunny jokes, tried to play nicey-nice. Just grow a spine and own up.