“If we don’t pass it by early 2010, we get into the congressional election period where this is just too controversial an issue,” Peabody said. “You’ve got too many different financial interests with opposing views that Congress just isn’t going to go out on a limb and pass it and put their re-election in jeopardy. We don’t think we’re going to see legislation until 2011.”
Nice work by Bloomberg.
‘See you on the other side’ - Meet Jessica Lum, a terminally ill 25-year-old who chose to spend what little time she had practicing journalism
#Realtalk: This is the best moment to be in journalism - The old stuff isn’t coming back, but that’s okay
Streams of consciousness - Millennials expect a steady diet of quick-hit, social-media-mediated bits and bytes. What does that mean for journalism?
Sticking with the truth - How ‘balanced’ coverage helped sustain the bogus claim that childhood vaccines can cause autism
An ink-stained stretch - Can Aaron Kushner save the Orange County Register—and the newspaper industry?
What to do if you find a baby bird
Expert advice
Inside Google’s secret lab
We might deplore the practice, but posting pictures of our food online is a way to bring everyone to the table
How the ‘World’s 50 Best’ list changed the way elite restaurants do business
“Every time the restaurant switched up its format, it got plenty of accompanying media coverage that let judges know they needed to return to see what was going on”
CJR's Guide to Online News Startups
Uptown Messenger – Hyperlocal news for a neighborhood in New Orleans
Who Owns What
The Business of Digital Journalism
A report from the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism
Questions and exercises for journalism students.
"...the $592 trillion over-the-counter derivatives market.”
That amount of money is just staggering. It impedes rational thought. We should just say "A little more that half-a-bazillion."
#1 Posted by Woody, CJR on Mon 31 Aug 2009 at 11:11 AM
Thanks for pointing that out, Woody.
I should have nicked Bloomberg for using that number without proper context. That's the nominal value of outstanding derivatives. The real value at stake is far, far less--something like 3% of nominal in the case of credit-default swaps. That's still a massive number, but nowhere near $592 trillion.
#2 Posted by Ryan Chittum, CJR on Mon 31 Aug 2009 at 11:35 AM
Ryan, any comment on the 60 Minutes broadcast on Sunday re: 2000 CFMA and the fact that it was the last bill of the session, without debate?
I had to wiki the CFMA to read about Phil Gramm/spousal involvement in its passage.
#3 Posted by War Eagle, CJR on Mon 31 Aug 2009 at 10:41 PM