Milken Institute's Global Conference 2008: Infectious Greed's Paul Kedrosky
I met blogger Paul Kedrosky face-to-face for the first time yesterday, just before he appeared on a panel I moderated at the 2008 Milken Institute Global Conference.
On our panel, Paul stressed more than once that he writes Infectious Greed for an audience of one: him. He maintains that he doesn't really care who reads his blog, how they use it, or whether it lives up to anyone's standards other than his own.
The panel was titled Econobloggers: Real-Time Information and Analysis From the Keyboard Next Door and Paul was a most appropriate expert, given the large following he has attracted for his Infectious Greed blog. Paul likes to stress in his official bios that he is "a sought after media personality" and no wonder, he is articulate, outspoken, even charming.
But he is, in my opinion, also dangerous.
Paul is one of many econobloggers who build audiences by opining on topics with great zest, but not always great knowledge.
On our panel, Paul stressed more than once that he writes Infectious Greed for an audience of one: him. He maintains that he doesn't really care who reads his blog, how they use it, or whether it lives up to anyone's standards other than his own.Perhaps that is why he is comfortable passing off hearsay (the polite word for gossip) as worthy of repetition, such as when he called for the firing of Microsoft's Steve Balmer on April 28th, citing Balmer's handling of the Yahoo! bid and relations with Jerry Yang as evidence.
Fair enough, everyone loves a critic and Paul is better than most. That Paul's extensive bio does not give rise to believing that he knows better than Microsoft's board what kind of leaders the company needs now is only a trivial point. Paul told the panel that much of his call to oust Ballmer was his own ranting - not anything he expected the world to take action upon.
It's what Paul wrote elsewhere in his same blog post that unsettles me: "The insider-ish sources I have say that while bankers are still fitfully running up some hours, on Sunday Ballmer and Yang still hadn't spoken in weeks -- and doing a deal will requires (sic) those two to get over one another."
The first part of that sentence isn't opinion. It is either true -- Ballmer and Yang have not spoken in weeks, or it is not true. No perspective needed there.
I questioned Paul on this and you might want to view his answer, as well as the supportive comments of fellow panel members who think that such gossip has a place in the blogosphere. Their oft-cited proof is Matt Drudge, who frequently gets scoops by daring to print gossip that later turns out to have merit. (What we don't hear about as often is all the gossip Drudge and other bloggers publish that later turns out to be utter rubbish.)
Bloggers aren't mainstream financial journalists and my panel of bloggers argued consistently that the world needs both. I remain unpersuaded.
I believe the greatest benefit financial bloggers offer is to express well-reasoned opinion based upon demonstrable logic and facts. I think it is valuable to hear why one smart observer thinks Ballmer should be ousted, even if that observer has not run his/her own mega-giant company and even if I don't share his/her opinion.
Where I fail to find the value is in taking shortcuts with the facts and fact-gathering. Paul knows the unlikelihood that either Ballmer or Yang will bother to correct him if his sources are ill-informed, so he is safe in pretty much passing along any such unsubstantiated information.
Maybe readers of Infectious Greed and other econoblogs know to take such "facts" with a large grain of salt. Maybe. But I am old-fashioned in that respect. I still prefer my facts unsalted.
I've been following Paul for quite some time and I've found that I've learned a lot from him on the "heard on the street" kind of things. Maybe not all true facts, but they help give a feel to the pulse of what's happening. I don't see him as dangerous and plan on reading what he has to say for a long time into the future.
Reply to this
There is a difference between what is fact, what is rumor, and what is opinion. You seem to be conflating all three.
How is Paul calling for Ballmer's ouster hearsay? That is unequivocally an opinion.
When he said "I HEAR THAT . . . " -- that's a rumor.
~~~
My own perspective is the value of bloggers is more than opinion, its analysis, context and commentary.
Reply to this
Yes, when Paul calls for Ballmer's ouster or hanging for that matter, he is entitled to his opinion. If he backs up his recommendation with a solid, logical argument, I find it beneficial. Less so if he's just spouting off -- "Oh, let's dump this CEO..."
Reply to this
I'm with Barry. Bloggers generally make no claim to being journalists nor news operations. Anyone who reads a blog goes into it knowing this in advance (or at least they should). Bloggers are basically columnists, not reporters.
Reply to this
Sorry. But bloggers can't have it both ways, which they try to do. They can't claim the rights of bona fide journalists, such as press access, which many do, and then hide behind their mother's skirt when it comes to accountability, saying, "hey, but we're not really journalists."
Reply to this
Just because they request press access doesn't mean they have to be given it. Anyone can ask. Let's face it, access is provided because the provider wants the publicity said blogger could provide.
And yes, bloggers are accountable. It comes in the same way that any other medium is accountable - from readers and sponors. If they are producing garbage they will soon find themselves with no one paying attention and no one paying for ad space - just like a telivision network, radio station, or newspaper.
Reply to this
Reply to this
Possible explanation #3: The prominent bloggers you note have developed a following and sponsorship base over time because they've establish their credibility. They are much closer to their readership and the sponsors who pay them than journalist/writers/reporters in other media. As such, they are less likely to make a big gaff.
Reply to this
Oh my, in making your argument you raise another very large issue. When I wrote for the Wall Street Journal, I never once met with a "sponsor" or "advertiser" of the paper's. Do you think it is possible that relying directly on advertisers/sponsors for your weekly paycheck might influence how you write and what you write about?
Reply to this
Worrying about bloggers spreading opinion/rumor mill/conjecture as "dangerous" is a bit myopic, imho.
People make big financial decisions based on rumor every day, with or without blogs.
The fact that you like your opinions with checkable facts is admirable, has its place, and probably will net you profitably over time. But it doesn't change the fact that there's massive demand for rumopinion that must be fed.
Reply to this
nfzeiuaf http://yciayxlm.com hyreftem ieijpkjl [URL=http://dbnidzqw.com]bdcbiazd[/URL] masieomw">http://fybjnrms.com">masieomw
Reply to this
ygrqfxtc http://hkxdgisy.com lwtlwaew jvuphxbw nixzhuxu">http://qbnaigej.com">nixzhuxu [URL=http://expaznss.com]gtyghrrp[/URL]
Reply to this
Paul Kedrosky is the Editor of "Infectious Greed," one of the best-known business blogs on the Internet. He is also a venture capitalist, an entrepreneur, an analyst for CNBC television and a columnist for TheStreet.com/RealMoney. Kedrosky is currently a senior fellow at the Kauffman Foundation, where he focuses on entrepreneurship, innovation and the future of risk capital. Would love to hear his thoughts on today's economy.
Reply to this