Comments on: The Zero Hedgies

By: Roadhouse

Roadhouse — Mon, 21 Jan 2013 08:22:46 +0000

Felix – your vitriol directed at ZH comes across as envy.

Because of course when you work for the MSM you check your journalistic credentials at the door and you become a sycophant to the corporations.

Sure you probably think what you write is real critique – but is it really – how far are you allowed to go without being slapped in the head by your editor – and eventually shown the door?

The reason I read ZH is because the MSM has let me down – most of what I see that passes for financial news these days resembles verbatim press releases (propaganda) from govt officials/central bankers.

There is for the most part no analysis and no questioning.

Case in point – recent 14% increase in China exports. Trumpeted across the home pages of MSM sites.

I immediately said whooooaaaa there… the EU is a wreck and the US stagnant. HOW is China growing exports?

But nope – none of the MSM sources asked that question – they just printed the BS without a second thought.

Another case in point – Fracking – the MSM reports this as if it were the 2nd coming of Christ.

Next to nothing is said about 1. toxic side effects 2. that is is hugely expensive and most importantly 3. I am not seeing any MSM suggesting that we are without a question at Peak CHEAP Oil because otherwise why in the hell are fracking, drilling miles beneath the sea and tearing apart the entire province of Alberta – to get at oil that is VERY expensive to extract?

When I go to ZH I get THE ANSWERS. That site will increase its traffic in direct proportion to the failures of the MSM to report accurately.

By: joe blow

joe blow — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 19:17:38 +0000

“Who are these people who flock to zerohedge.com and lap up everything they’re served?”–Felix SalmonThe distortion, through which anyone sees and mistakenly attributes to ‘others’ may merely be an aspect of our own reflection, unrecognized. Contemplate and possibly recognize this, if you will, “Ignorance created gods and cunning took advantage of the opportunity.”

By: capitan_mex

capitan_mex — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 20:01:47 +0000

ZH frequent reader.ZH is the best financial blog ever.You should be ashamed for assuming people are stupid.

By: DH

DH — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 02:04:03 +0000

one of the commenters here said: “Sigh. For gosh sakes, get your facts straight. Dan is NOT Tyler. At best, he is a contributor. Nice try, but a big strike out. There were a few clues way back as to who the original TD really was, but fortunately, those even those random clues have been removed.”I’ve read zh since just about day one (stumbled upon it somehow) and I clearly remember the clues (actually the identity issue was likely an oversight/error) referenced in the quote above. The person Daniel Ivandjiiski who is referred to as “the TD” by Hagan and the NY Post is most likely not from the information that I recall. Then again, it doesn’t really matter as I don’t know any of these people and am much more interested in content and the points of views expressed. It’s the message vs. messenger, “Publius” thing for me.I read approx. 10 hrs per day (unemployed/semi retired from financial sector)from very diverse sources about finance, economics, politics and zh is daily stop, wherein I read most zh articles. I am not a daytrader. I don’t find the site geared at all to daytraders but rather to people interested in finance/politics who know that the underbelly of the street and politicians has always been pretty dirty and are curious to hear more about it. I cannot ever recall seeing ZH make any particular investing decisions.Frankly, I view them most favorably as very smart rabble rousing patriots exposing the financial charades and chicanery between the financial and political communities in the USA to the detriment of most US citizens. ZH (as well as other blogs) has brought to the surface many matters that the established financial media have either missed or failed to report or perhaps, just maybe, felt pressured not to report because of financial pressure or interests from ownership groups or related parties. I think the odds of ZH exposing additional interesting matters to the general public will be much higher than what I expect from the established financial media.I’m convinced they are doing the honorable duty because they are making a hell of a lot of people very, very uncomfortable and ultimately that is a great thing for the USA.

By: TC

TC — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 23:41:02 +0000

…as opposed to the calm, rational sociopathology of institutional traders and the market-makers.

By: Jon

Jon — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 17:53:18 +0000

More paranoid daytraders:http://baselinescenario.com/2 009/10/02/too-connected-to-fail/

By: PV

PV — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 14:05:30 +0000

Felix, I think I can provide some perspective here. I am a regular reader of ZH, but am also an “industry insider”, on the regulatory side, where I have the ability to verify much of the information on ZH. Tyler does in fact post relevant and useful information, and is often the first to major stories. ZH has been an important source in our regulatory efforts (ref. high frequency trading), and while Tyler and Marla and co. aren’t always right, they are well-informed and insightful enough that they are worth paying attention to.As opposed to the ZH commenters. A more emotionally unstable and ill-informed crowd you will have a difficult time finding on the internet. Next to them, the BusinessInsider/Clusterstock crowd looks positively intelligent; even the Dealbreaker crowd looks good by comparison (and it’s telling that the Dealbreaker minions, who constitute real industry insiders, have nothing but contempt for the ZHers.)I have made efforts to have an intelligent dialog with the ZH crowd (excluding Tyler and the other principals), and it’s a losing battle. It is nothing but hysterics, and it’s painfully evident that only a handful have relevant experience and useful insights. As such, I stick to just the posts from the ZH principals, and skip the comments entirely. At least the DB comments can be entertaining; the ZH comments don’t even have that going for them. I don’t think I’m alone, and my suspicion is that ZH is read by a large number of industry people, but most of them, like myself, waste no time in the comments section.

By: Peter

Peter — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 03:08:43 +0000

These blogging sites took-off the same day your ad revenue fell off a cliff.Reuters, Bloomberg, WSJ, and-the-like, and all-in-unison, chimed in on the “green shoots” thesis in order to save their bottom lines.You sacrificed your integrity, started cheerleading and only reported the positive.Your audience saw right through it and left in droves. The same has happened with newspapers and MSM.The audience is NOT stupid; but you seem to think so – at your peril…

By: GK

GK — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 01:02:34 +0000

Have you no shame? The mainstream media herded the population like sheep for decades. Rarely questioning the soundness of our economy or the undue influence and recklessness of the major banks.The financial blogosphere saved my ass. When I felt that something was amiss in early 2007 – it was the blogosphere that painted me the REAL PICTURE. And losers like you after the fact say things like “no one saw this coming!” LOL…You, Felix, et al, did nothing. I read you guys for entertainment; the blogs for info. Yeah, I have to sift thru the blogs, but it’s a hell of a lot easier than believing a captured MSM.You let us down MSM… it’s no surprise your viewership is dropping fast. Off to the trash heap of history for many of you. Good riddance. And by the way, whatever your salary is Felix, it’s too much.You guys in the MSM failed us – so please stop your whining.

By: bob

bob — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 00:50:52 +0000

There seems to be a consensus among the media types that Felix Salmon finds respectable that Paulson, Bernanke et. al. saved the world a year ago by giving money to failing, too-big-too-fail banks and their bondholders, that the current administration, advised by many of these same wise people, is continuing this heroic work, that these disinterested public servants are still saving us all from an economic apocalypse, that their success is proven by higher stock prices, and that their failure to tie any kind of reform of how these banks do business to the massive outlays of taxpayer money used to rescue them had nothing to do with their personal agendas and loyalties but was simply an oversight that may still be corrected down the road once the world is saved. All of these assumptions are rarely challenged or even examined outside of the blogs that Felix Salmon denigrates, but they seem suspect to many people who care about these issues and spend a lot of time thinking about them. For the most part, these are people who do not benefit very much, directly or indirectly, when these banks make large profits. To them, the reluctance of the mainstream media to question these assumptions is a serious failing that feels like a passive form of the cheerleading that occurs all day long on the cable stock market shows. Portraying the difference between mainstream media and bloggers as a clear matter of right vs. wrong thinking, with bloggers as disreputable conspiracy nuts and plugged-in jounalists as serious intellectuals who give powerful bankers and politicians the respect their positions entitle them to, also seems like bad faith to these people. There is a divide, however, and Felix Salmon needs to decide which side of it he is on. This is a problem for him, no doubt, because being on the wrong side will certainly affect his career prospects.

By: T

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 23:54:55 +0000

Avid intellectuals who follow multiple streams of media would find this article a bit ignorant. For “pop” culture to catch on to a intellectual’s website; than attempt to judge that website on the basis of one perception is a lack of understanding of macro/micro trends in global economics/politics. Maybe there attempting to hack at the “hits” of the loyal avid “day-trade losers” who must follow everything written on the web.

By: RS

RS — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 23:31:22 +0000

Go back to 4chan Felix, you are way over your head here. If you can’t handle unbridled ideas and discussion then get out of the kitchen. Your political correctness and broad judgment serves no purpose and has no value.

By: phil_hubb

phil_hubb — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 23:30:49 +0000

Jeez, you reuter’s salary men are so damned envious of zero hedge’s success.But must you be so obvious about it?

By: TC

TC — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 23:13:01 +0000

Felix Salmon — I quote you alongside your fellow MSM shills here:http://catastrophist.wordpress.com/ 2009/10/02/defending-goldman-sachs-joe-h agan-msm-shill-vs-zero-hedge-blog/Defend ing Goldman Sachs: Joe Hagan (MSM shill) vs. Zero Hedge (blog)In this month’s NY Mag story, Joe Hagan continues to defend Goldman Sachs by attacking Zero Hedge blog and its 330k/month readership. Simultaneously, Justin Fox is supporting the hit-piece at his Time.com blog – arguing that readers of Zero Hedge are “paranoid nutters” who engage in “conspiracy theories” which — most damningly — are only right “once in a while”.[...]According to Hagan’s narrative, Ivandjiiski (AKA Tyler Durden) became “emboldened” by increased site traffic and began to write more-detailed postings, outlining his “radical notions” of un-manipulated markets and governments. Thus “Zero Hedge’s popularity metastasized with its increasingly paranoid focus.” Soon, we are told, Ivandjiiski was seduced by the site’s ad revenue and “a newly minted sense of his own importance”, and Zero Hedge became, as Reuters contractor Felix Salmon would write three days later, a “Dan Brown novel” for “delusional retail day-traders”.[Continues...]

By: leftback

leftback — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 22:38:06 +0000

Felix, You have got this all wrong. ZH is unmasking criminal market manipulation.”If you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem.” Get a clue, Felix.