There was about a year and a half when I was completely addicted to CNBC. It was the mid to late 90s, around 97 or 98, when I was starting to write more online and became fascinated by how technology was driving the economy and stock market to new heights. I remember having CNBC on all day along (along with CNN and MSNBC), and I loved seeing all the numbers fly by the bottom of the screen. Sure, I had no idea what any of it meant, but CNBC also had a lighter, pop culture bent to it that made it entertaining. I watched Power Lunch every afternoon, I waited for interviews with the CEOs of companies I was intererested in (like Steve Jobs from Apple - that was a big comeback story), and I even got to know the anchors and reporters (oh, Maria Bartiromo!).
Then the bubble burst and people didn't really enjoy watching CNBC anymore. And now it's really a shadow of what it used to be. But now two guys are trying to make it good again. Ex-Today producer Jonathan Wald and ex-60 Minutes producer Josh Howard have been brought on to pump new life into the business network. The duo plans more documentaries, as well as other big changes for the network.
What do you think needs to be done to CNBC to make it better?
The TV Squad Podcast: Vik Sahay of Chuck, Oprah talk, brutal timeslots, and more!
TV Squad Ten: Top Ten ESPN shows from worst to first
Andy Richter: The TV Squad Interview
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
7-04-2006 @ 4:35PM
tozmervo said...
Heh heh, I'm glad I'm not the only one that went through a CNBC phase. Mine was post-bubble though. I wonder if I would have watched it as much if I had the slightest idea what they were talking about.
I don't know much about hip, but I always wished they talked more about industries in an educational manner - that is, tell us about industries. You know, documentary like (I know... not hip).
Long live Maria Bartiromo!
Reply
7-05-2006 @ 6:53AM
kip said...
I work in finance so this may be a little biased. CNBC needs to develop longer term stories that get covered over multiple days. They really jsut follow the WSJ and Financial times in what they are following. They also need to stop hyping everything. The last fed move was hyped as one of the biggest issues to occur this year and was a quarter point(think of Geraldo opening up Capone's vault). I think they have cried wolf for too long and subsequently why many firms mute them. They also have very few bloggers on, have horrible infomercials on the rest of the time , and their European/Asian coverage is so small when in reality there is so much going on that its crazy.
I think the reason why they are going this way is that they have a great reporting staff, especially David Faber.
Reply