Felix Salmon

Disclosing journalists’ pasts

By Felix Salmon
November 19, 2009

Dear Henry,

I’m not annoyed by you! How could I be, when you call me the “king of financial bloggers” no fewer than four times in one piece? I think you’ve created a powerful, innovative, and disruptive franchise in The Business Insider, which employs some very smart people and publishes some great journalism — even if sometimes it’s neither checked nor correct. I’m entirely happy that you’re out there hiring people even as most publications are doing the opposite, and I wish you and your investors the very best of fortune.

My blog entry yesterday was not about you qua entrepeneur; I just thought that if you were going to get into the business of publishing earnings estimates for technology companies — exactly the business you were banned from by the SEC — then it might be worth mentioning the ban as you did so.

In fact, the blog entry wasn’t really about you at all, as you might have surmised from the picture at the top and the lead paragraph, which were all about Michael Whitney. Maybe you could answer my questions where Bloomberg’s Judith Czelusniak didn’t: do you think it was OK for Bloomberg to hire Whitney and not disclose his past? If not, would it have been OK for Bloomberg to hire Whitney if they had disclosed his past?

I suspect that the differences between us are not particularly great, and that we believe that while such episodes aren’t necessarily disqualifying when it comes to hiring journalists, they should definitely be treated transparently. At the margin, the necessity of disclosing such things might well lead media organizations to pick an experienced out-of-work journalist instead: that clearly doesn’t apply in your case, where you’re the hirer rather than the prospective employee.

You say that you’ve disclosed everything in great detail in the past — this is true, and in fact I linked to one such disclosure. I feel that the disclosure should be a permanent thing, easily available to new readers, especially when you start revisiting ground extremely similar to that which you trod as a securities analyst. It’s not a major difference.

I think we’d have a much more substantive disagreement if you defended Bloomberg’s failure to disclose Whitney’s past, or Thom Calandra’s failure to disclose his own past when selling his new newsletter; I look forward to reading your views on them. But as it is, I think you might be overreacting to my piece slightly.


Felix Salmon, KFB

9 comments so far | RSS Comments RSS

You have such a sweet way of showing affection

Posted by blubber | Report as abusive

Witch hunts…. god love ‘em.


KFB: “Ka-Friggin’ Boom”

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.ph p?term=KFB

Re strapline: nothing’s obscure anymore if it’s visible to search engines. But who’s the deputy, and who’s the lord? (Lord Sith?) No matter — the antic sits, crown or not.


Thank you for reminding me why I stopped reading your blog in the first place: you and your blog are a waste of time. On the other hand, I do read Blodget’s every day.

Posted by Myr | Report as abusive

KFB: Kill from behind.


Myr, my reaction was exactly the opposite. I stopped reading Blodget and read Felix every day. Much love.

Posted by Unsympathetic | Report as abusive

This exchange (I hope it will continue) is the most interesting I have seen anywhere in a month. One vote here for meta. Henry, if you let it drop, we’ll sic that guy who spoke to his kid in Klingon for three years on you.

Posted by SelenesMom | Report as abusive

Picking up where you left off at portfolio…

Picking fights for no reason at all. Ho hum, at least it keeps us all entertained.

Posted by TC | Report as abusive

If Bernie madoff started publishing a split strike newsletter people would be pissed…why aren’t they pissed about blodget?!?! Because people are dumb and have no memory.

Posted by Al Coholic | Report as abusive

Post Your Comment

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/