One Becky Quick, an actual host [!] on CNBC, appeared on an MSNBC panel discussing the recent ‘tell-all’ op-ed by that Goldman-Sacks guy that appeared in the New York Times. In it, he excoriated his former employer. Ms. Quick was suspicious. Here is some of what she said (from the one, the only, the exquisite Charles Pierce):
“I would feel very differently about this if it had been something that had been leaked to a reporter for the Times, who then went out and did a lot of confirming, and finding both sides of the story and reporting it out. I don’t know a lot about this gentleman. I never heard of him before. I don’t know what happened there. Taking it just as a letter itself, it seems like a disgruntled employee.”
(Pierce notes here that she doesn’t seem to know the difference between an Op-Ed and a Letter to the Editor.) Here’s more of Quickety-Quick’s quackery:
“To Charles’s point about how the rest of the country’s going to read this, it’s probably true and it’s probably unfortunate, because they’re not going to go back and look at the actual details, and back again to why was this a letter to the editor, instead of a fully reported piece that gives you both sides* of the story . . . . And I hate to say that this is just a disgruntled employee, because I don’t know enough about it. I wish I knew more about it. I wish I could tell you about what was happening on the inside.”
[Pierce speaks] Yes, if this country only had, say, a television network the sole function of which was to, you know, report on the financial industry, we would be much better off.
I bet she’s going to be a star.
* Dear lady, stories don’t have ‘sides’. Stories tell the story.