"The Media's Fault." AGAIN????

Hi Liz, The media may be indirectly responsible for this problem. It is failing to demand accountability from the people (government) who are responsible for regulating the financial industry. The government's only job is to protect the people. My grade for the regulators: F- How can confidence be restored to the market when there is no assurance that the holes in the leaky boat are being plugged? The government's response up to this point is to buy more bilge pumps. In typical government fashion,the politicians scream for new rules and hold no one accountable.The response to 9-11 was identical. Many people failed to do their jobs leading up to those tragic events. What was their penalty? Make these idiots fear you! They're not your friends.

Well it all began several years ago when legislation was passed making it easier for those who could not afford home ownership, the ability to still own a home. The Birth of Sub-Prime and Fannie Ma and Freddie Mac,playing major roles in guaranteeing/backing the loans. But it really started when liberals in Congress came to the conclusion that it was a right of all people in this country to own a home, not a privilege. I strongly believe that this is not over, and the rest of us Baby Boomers, who played the game many years ago,by the rules,and rented until we could truly afford to buy, will end up taking a beating when we have to pay the piper in the future. We will be faced with years of inflation that we will have to deal with on our fixed incomes.

Sure why not blame the media. No one else is taking responsibility for the mess. Not Greenspan, not the banks giving rediculous loans, not the people signing the rediculous loans.

The media did not create the problem. However fear is contagious and the media has a powerful part to play, either for calming or for exacerbating. Please use your considerable power to help turn this thing around. Gloomy reports generate gloomy consumers and gloomy consumers generate more gloomy reports. Bad cycle. Without taking blame for the cause, how about acknowleging the media's contribution to the fear.

Liz You ask "who is at fault" and in my opinion its pretty simple -- 1) People who live above their means, borrowing more than they can afford in orderto impress their family/friends/neighbors and feed their own insecurities while failing to save for the inevitable economic downturns. 2)Financial institutions for abandoning their good sense on what a good risk is and what it isn't 3)Our elected officials for creating policies like the Community Reinvestment Act requiring financial institutions to create a perception of "what is fair" in lending without regard to the risk a loan applicant might repreent, simply becuase the applicant fits the profile of "the disenfranchised" and without regard to their creditworthiness 4)The individuals in this country who vote for or fail to vote at all for elected officials who clearly disregard capitalism and common sense. 5)AND MIGHT I ADD an entire generation (or two) of people who have no sense of financial responsibility and have raised their children to believe that they are entitled. A generation of moochers and looters and a very few producers who are expected to care for them by "spreading the wealth"... Oh and by the way, the media for failing its obligation of reporting the news with any objectivity but rather have become organizations that are clearly comfortable expressing their bias and reinforcing their subjective agendas.

Ms. Claman, I blame dumb people seeking quick bucks. Doesn't hard work mean anything to anyone anymore? -Burnsie

I don't think the "blame the media" rant is aimed at business channels, rather network news that, because of time limitations, only hit the talking points. Business channels have more time and add various viewpoints and analysis. Network news just give the "train wreck" version because that is what sells advertising. I think the average Joe and Jane are postponing large purchases, particularly real estate, because Katie said this and Charlie said that in their 15 second sound bite. With their purpose to gain market share, yes, the media does own some of the blame for their scare tactics.

The source is human nature and our inherent covetiousness / greed / envy to have what we do not have. We believe that if we have "it", it will make us happy. To combat this, we have laws, but as a people, we have been lax in holding others responsible for their actions, and for quickly and fairly punishing their errant ways.

Where does it all begin? It begins with the individual consumer - I'm not hearing a lot of discussion on this - if we take the responsibility away from the consumer and place it on the mortgage lender, then we inherit an even larger population of those that are incapable of taking care of themselves, and we make adjustments on their behalf such as extending their morgtages - where is the accountability of the individual? No one forced these people to purchase outrageous homes did they? Ultimately they were the ones that signed the lending papers - those who are facing foreclosure probably should adjust their lifestyles and consumer spending, agree?

On the contrary, I think we have the media to thank for calling out people like AIG for taking ridiculous, luxurious meetings, and we have them to thank for keeping us posted on what businesses are responsible for the economic crisis we've been in.

Liz- Many people blame the business media because they feel it is a "shill" for the stock market. A goodly percentage of these individuals are already retired and bought into the mantras of financial advisers that "one must still have growth in retirement, don't outlive your money( a baby boomer favorite), you're not your parents generation etc. etc. What happens therefore, after one retires and the "growth" retreats and sometimes collapses? If a person is drawing from a retirement account as part of his or her retirement plan, do they now stop drawing while the stock market is supposed to rebound? What if the Bear Market lasts for 5-7 years? How is the lost income to be replaced? When people are 40 or 45 years old, they can replace the losses because they will continue to work. Those who are 63 or 66 or 70, can't "just wait it out." The lost years will not come back. That is why people like me become furious listening to these "fiancial experts" blather on and on and on about how "over a 20 year period, the stock marketaverages..........." Averages? People do not live off averages! One does not call the electric company or the gas company or the credit card companies and say, "my averages are down this year. Please! Enough of this prattle already! If you are beginning to think that I am one who fell into this trap, you would be mistaken. Between 3 and 5 five years before my wife and I retired, we moved all of our equity holdings into solid fixed percentage instruments. In addition, we spent the last 5-7 years prior to our retirement retiring all of our debt. Most important, we resisted the sales pitches of financial advisors and experts to engage in speculative endeavors that would pose a threat to our planned retirement. That is why the business media is viewed skeptically and with some derision by the the public. At least the public like me. By the way, I never miss your show on FBN when I'm home. Nice work.

Liz, There is plenty of blame to go around, but my two favorites are the politicians (Dems. and Repubs.) and the financial services industry. Lets start with the repeal of Glass Steigel, which broke the barriers between investment banks and commercial lenders.When this took place at the turn of the century these institutions did not properly separate clients assets from company assets and therefore available when ever I need the money. The failure of Fannie and Freddie which i believe can be layed directly at the feet of the politicos. These GSE's were staffed with political cronies and used to promote political aims through aggressive social goals that led to agressive lending practices that put share holders and tax payers at great risk. Only time, public pressure and political will can determine how much corruption and fraud played a role in the demise of these entities. Additionally, powerfull politicians at the state and national level put pressure on financial institutions in the private sector to make loans they otherwise would not enter into. Market and institution regulators looking the other way so as not to interrupt the money party going on in the market place. Hedge funds and investment banks intertwined relationships which mingled regulated activities/funds with the unregulated so called sophisticated money and created counterparty conflicts of interests and risk. In closing I must say that you are as glamorous, vibrant and intellectually stimulating as always. Barry, Ararat,NC

Liz, If certain rascals are pulling scams, the last thing they want is a pesky, objective media outing them. The more they squawk the more the media must be on to them. We rely on you guys to ferret out the facts. Keep up the good work. Damn the torpedoes,full speed ahead.

I firmly believe this whole financial mess is directly cause by Liberals, whether Democrat or Republican, who meddled in the free-market with laws and regulations that required financial institutions to either lend money to people that wouldn't have been able to qualify normally or face fines or regulatory actions. This attempt at social engineering is the root cause. Sure there were later 'innovations' that made it possible for the banks to over-leverage their loan portfolios but at least if the underlying loans were good, they'd be able to value them instead of them being toxic.

Try publishing some things that are going right and back off on the sensationalism of the bad news headlines. If you do some digging (like reporters used to) you might find some good in these times.

Our government... they changed the playing field by creating an imbalance in free markets by forcing social engineering without regard to fundamental financial principles. Loan officers could not have originated high risk products without investors offering them. The investors would not have offered the product without a market to buy these loans at a profit. Fannie and Freddie would not have provided the market without pressure from HUD and Congress. The rating companies had to convince investors these were solid investments and sold them here and abroad. It would have all worked out had there not been a pesky thing called fundamentals. Whether you like it or not,$2.00 + $2.00 will always and forever equal $4.00. A mathematical/financial concept that is no longer being embedded into our youth by the educational system funded by... the government. We must base our efforts on reality if we wish to be successful. If you strive for an idealistic outcome that flies in the face of time tested principles... you'll be met with failure. Belief does not equate to truth.

It's not a matter of who's fault all of this is, it's just that the media continues to fuel the fire of doom and gloom to the American people. When will we all stand up and understand that is going to take all of us, WITH A POSITIVE ATTITUDE, to get stay the tide???????

Liz, It is not your fault. The media does have some influence, but the media did not make the bad business decisions or create the bad law that allowed the decisions to be made. Nor did the media drive up executive compensation and fail to tie it to actual results. The media does not make the stock traders race around the trading floor screaming (like the scene in 'Trading Places') every time there is a hiccup somewhere in the world. The media did not create the ridiculous quarterly expectations placed on companies by analysts who only care about a quarterly profit regardless of how that positions a company for the future. The media did not cause the average investor to be completley uninformed about how a stock market effects everybody and not just people who own stock. The media does not instill the base level of greed and self interest in all of us (we come by that naturally). The list can go on an on. Show all the 'Breaking News' you want. It makes us all feel we know more than we really do. Good Luck.

When it comes to the global marketplace and business news coverage media in the case of the failed banks shouldn't get all the blame. In fact the rumors,short seelling and speculators should share in the blame issue. What the business news media should focus on what lays ahead. Like do an interveiw with Alvin Toffler and see how the markets are going to look ten or twenty years down the road. Or see how a knowledge economy wave could wipe the ancient industrial 20th century wave economics as we know. In business there isn't static but a constant ebb of change.

Liz: This typifies the paradigm shift in the American psyche that has take place over the past couple decades. Even as a 28 year old, I can still remember being told never to blame anyone for my defects socially, economically, fundamentally or emotionally. Yet over the past 20 years our country and it's citizens have gourged on lawsuits that tought our children (and viewers) that it's ok to blame others for these defects. The government handouts and frivalous lawsuits, whether justified or not have ripened the Americans tastebuds for blaming others. What was once a country admired for it's principles of a "bootstrap-work-ethic" has become... well it's certainly something else entirely. Thanks. Jesse Neil Smedberg

Liz, The media is at fault for not looking up better commentators on the recent financial difficulties. For example, politician A says we need to do "X." Instead of getting other pundits and business officials to chime in, try getting some fundamentally sound economists to comment, i.e. economists not in favor of gov't instrusion. Then have these economists tell us why gov't intrusion is problematic. These economists are out there. If they're a Keynesian school economist, then you've already heard their side, because these folks are advising the politicians. Get some Austrian school economists to chime in. No the media didn't cause the financial panic/crisis. Did it exacerbate it? I doubt it did much to make it worse. However, the gov't is definitely going to long-run make it worse. The best thing the media can do is go outside the Keynesian economics school dominating the airwaves and get some sound Austrian school economists to comment. Their explanations are always so reasonable and on point to cut through policital fog and nonsense. If you do this, viewers will flock to your network because they'll be given sound info.

Well, here is a shocker for you....since you and your buddies in the business/financial news reporting arena are soooo smart and are supposed to be journalists - why don't you do a little investigative journalism and find out who is responsible for this latest financial "crisis"? After all, it took you completely by surprise! You guys spent the last two years giving your impression of, "Gee whizz...what's going on?" and "Long term, we will be fine." You know, the standard empty talk and platitudes we have come to expect from the talking heads of the media. You and your media compadres contributed to this mess for the simple reason we depended on you to at least give us a hint of what was going on - and what did you do.....nothing.

Funny did not know the media had any say as to what companies did. Is that the same media that says if you don't vote for BO your racist? Is this the same media that won't ask the Democrates hard questions? Guess they did not mention the policy that actually started this hole mess was lobbied by ACORN and the Democrates pushed it threw and then PRES of the day Billy "intern affair" Clinton signed it. And the Democrates have been blocking any Republician effort the last several years to even do anything about it until it was to late. Hole lot of blame games going on nation wide and hole bunch of people really ticked about it.

I agree, part of it is the media's fault. The media dwells on the situation and has nothing but doom and gloom. There have been positive reports about housing and the LIBOR is going down. I was shocked yesterday that you had someone on predicting a new Bull market. More things like that need to be said out there, not just that the world is going to end. Plus, keep Cody quiet. The guy does nothing but preach negativity.