awval999 wrote:Well. He didn't say anything untrue. And that's why it's allowed. Of course he omitted that 80% of mutual funds fail to beat the index over the long-term.
I simply couldn't let this pass. Paraphrasing gives us: CNBC allowed it only because he didn't say anything untrue. I very much doubt that the CNBC interviewers know what is, and what is not, true about finance or much else as their guests present information in real time. We are seeing little other than thinly veiled advertising for the financial firms the guests represent. And the hosts are not likely to challenge the honesty of their guests whom they depend on to keep the show running.
Broadening out from CNBC to Cable and other news in general, the magnitude of untruth I have seen broadcast is simply staggering. And much of it was of a nature that did not profit the guest or report concerned, but merely reflected the limited vetting of facts and knowledge of the people presenting the news. They are on tv for their charisma and presentation skills not for being genuises. When they (which could be NCBC CNN or any other network) addresses a topic I have familiarity with through my profession or some longtime private interest, I become aware of their limitations in reporting the truth. I've seen CNN make high-school level errors on matters of science, law, and politics.
Returning to the practicalities of wathching financial broadcasts, I would take anything I hear on TV with many grains of salt. Ignorance and self-interest are bad enough by themselves. But, in combination, they can be toxic to the net worth of anyone who takes the information at face value. I assume that most Bogleheads know to heavily filter the information from the financial media since the Boglehead authors (especially W. Bernstein) tend to teach skepticism about the intentions of the investment industry. However, the other 99% of the population is at risk of falling prey to the propaganda.
I have a relative in Canada who lobbied to have the govt there force financial advisor ads to carry a warning, as with cigarette packages, notfiying the public that the advisors are acting in their own best interest and that their interests frequently conflict with those of their clients. As always, he was shot down by industry lobbyists who inevitably have more weight and money to throw around within the govt bodies that regulate the industry than the not-for-profit advocates do. Thus, the only remedy is to learn about this by reading for oneself, and actively distrusting what one hears on the for-profit investment media.