http://www.newcanaannewsonline.com/news/ article/New-Canaan-woman-accused-of-cybe r-harassing-high-778165.php

Maybe I need to spend more time with her work to be be on the same page as all of these admirers here but from what I’ve seen, she’s not much of a journalist. She’s an inflammatory rumor-monger. (And no, I’ve never been a target of any of her stories nor anyone I’m close to.) A long list of people probably wanted her fired.

I’ve followed Ms. Buhl’s writing for about a year now since first seeing her stories on the NY Post and Dealbreaker.com et al, and although I don’t agree with everything she writes, I think the true journalistic service she provides to the public – and specifically the investing public – is invaluable.

I’m in the real estate finance area of the investment arena myself and certainly everyone hates bad publicity in their own space – and it certainly doesn’t make it easier to raise money. That said, however, I absolutely believe that the hedge fund, private equity, etc. sector needs reporters like Ms. Buhl as a watchdog, because it sure as hell beats the alternative: the possibility of more government regulation.

And government regulation certainly doesn’t work as we saw in the meltdown of the highly regulated mortgage industry and the SEC/Madoff failure.

As tough as the medicine might be in the short-term, the best way to get the government out of the over-regulation business, and to instill greater investor confidence in Hedge Funds et al, is to hope that all the “bad” funds get cleaned up sooner, rather than later – and I can only imagine that there are many, many more bad funds out there waiting to be exposed.

[And a free, obvious hint to the investing public: when a fund, or any business for that matter, begins blaming their current or future performance on bad press: RUN FOR THE HILLS and redeem on the way… Because I have yet to see “bad press” coming early to the party - see developers blaming reporters for the crash of the Florida Condo Market.]

Print media has for years been blaming the Internet for the loss of readers (and advertisers) and perhaps there is some truth to that explanation, but maybe it’s also true that the quality, and as importantly, independence, of this media is getting worse by the day – e.g. it’s still inexplicable that the major business press ignored the numerous red-flags for years and missed the massive Madoff fraud, largely because he was “well liked and respected”.

However, although Ms. Buhl is still a relatively new journalist, I understand from very good sources that her reporting has led to at least 1 or 2 ongoing fraud investigations, and probably will lead to others in the future. So it’s unfortunate that she wasn’t around early enough to catch Bernie…

The obvious fact that the financial press – and again the public – needs more investigative reporters makes it all the more disconcerting that although I admittedly don’t know the specific, real reasons why Ms. Buhl was let go, it does appear to lean to an explanation that some people didn’t like what she wrote about them.

Unfortunately, and tragically, millions of people have lost their jobs in the last couple of years. However, what is at issue here is not the loss of just another job. It’s a reporter being discharged under very questionable grounds – and a reporter’s job is the only private sector job where the freedom to discharge their responsibilities is specifically protected by the U.S. Constitution.

The “rough writing” explanation doesn’t make sense, because I think Ms. Buhl’s writing actually improved in her short stint at Hearst/Greenwich Times, as I’m sure they had good editors.

Also, to be a devil’s advocate, if Ms. Buhl’s writing was a little “rough”, I would think that Hearst/Greenwich Times knew that going in and that was the job of their editors to correct and improve upon her skills.

Ms. Buhl’s strengths are that she has good instincts for a real story. And more importantly, she has the courage to report it.

Courage and instincts are qualities that can’t be coached.

Basically, the once-great news organization Hearst/Greenwich Time has made a deliberate decision to continue ever downward on their path to mediocrity, if they’re not already below that level.

In the end, I’m very sure Ms. Buhl will do very well in her career and I wish her the best.

Frank Harrison

@justsaying123 you are likely a penny stock holder of Spongetech or work for Metter if you didn’t enjoy that story.

Very very dangerous!

If the editors were satisfied with Teri’s reporting, they should have made an effort to look it over before the news was posted. Or at the very least hire a freelance editor to look it over. Also, blame the economics of journalism. News organizations, now known as “content providers,” have been engaging in a race to the bottom. More original stories, more site hits, more potential ad revenue, produced for as little as possible in cost. I don’t know how much Teri was paid at the GT, but her stories required intensive reporting. Stories of her caliber usually run once a week, not once or twice a day. Teri’s best work has been her long form investigative pieces, which take weeks and months to complete. I look forward to seeing more of them. In the interim, I hope there are editors out there willing to work with her.

http://greenwichroundup.blogspot.com/201 0/03/032110-charlie-gasparino-has-no-com ment.html

Regardless – based on what else I’ve read about the situation – the firing had nothing to do with printing his home address. Gasparino should be thankful Buhl even wrote about him. It got his name out to Greenwich housewives.

That being said, I thought you were a very talented writer and I hope that this is only a temporary setback on your road to success. I’m sure you will garner some sympathy from someone who can help you out. Good luck.