Recent Blog Posts
-
Conde Nast Closing 'Portfolio'
Apr 27 200910:02 am EDT -
Newspaper Circ: 'WSJ' Gains as 'NY Post' Tumbles
Apr 27 20099:32 am EDT -
Idle Chatter: The Prognosis for Newspapers, more
Apr 27 20098:55 am EDT -
Late Breaks: MySpace, NYT, 'New York'
Apr 24 20094:01 pm EDT -
Nostalgia, Entitlement and Murdoch's 'Journal'
Apr 24 20094:00 pm EDT
Links
- SI.com - Richard Deitsch
- I Want Media
- Editor & Publisher
- Galleycat
- Magazine Death Pool
- WWD's Memo Pad
- Talking Biz News
- Media Nation
- Hollywood Wiretap
- FAIR
- The Media Pundit
- NYT Media
- MediaFile
- Gapper Blog - Media
- Jezebel
- The Business Insider
- Viral Video
- Ad Age
- Newsbusters
- News After Newspapers
- Nikki Finke
- News Hounds
- NY Observer media page
- Valleywag
- Paid Content
- TVNewser
- Nieman Journalism Lab
- Romenesko
- Keith Kelly
- Contact Me
- Cover Awards
- Tyndall Report
- Jon Friedman
- Gawker
- Jon Fine
- Media Shift
- HuffPo Media
Jim Cramer 1, Barron's 0
This is one of the more enjoyable media pissing contests going on at the moment: Jim Cramer vs. Barron's.
It started when the Dow Jones-owned finance magazine published an article over the weekend arguing that Cramer, the host of CNBC's Mad Money, has been giving bad advice, telling viewers to pick stocks that, as a whole, have underperformed the market.
Cramer, who's not exactly a sedate type, fired back in dubious style, suggesting that the Barron's story was a hit piece sanctioned by owner Rupert Murdoch, whose new Fox Business Network will compete with CNBC.
A better riposte is this bit of number-crunching from Cramer's TheStreet.com, which, using a slightly different and arguably superior methodology, found not only that Cramer's picks have significantly outperformed the market, but that Barron's's own picks have done just the opposite.
Mess with the bull...
