Comment About Matt Taibbi on Short-Selling

Link to article that this post is based on

Following is JML's comment on Matt Taibbi's article, and my reply (I am going by the handle "scintillation")

#
JML | October 20, 2009 at 11:39 am

Matt-
It would be fine if you focused on facts like this… with a conclusion such as “maybe regulators should enforce existing laws.” The problem is you consistently nestle valid points in prose that is 9/10ths rhetorically embellished bullshit and yellow journalism. It’s amazing you actually receive compensation for wooing the unknowing through hyperbole.
Reply

*
scintillation | October 20, 2009 at 5:04 pm

to me taibbi’s jouralism is all fact, no fluff. he engages in journalistically conveying objective and/or subjective observations about the matter.

he objectively reports about moral basket cases, and he objectively conveys normal subjective human reactions to moral basket cases.

taibbi weaves into his prose emotional responses to the ethical cesspools of goldman-sachs and the like.

one’s own subjective response can be considered at times to be objective actionable information, even in the area of being a physician, which is a bastion of objectivity. i read in the Merck Manual once (a doctors’ manual) about diagnosing a certain psychiatric disorder. if the doctor felt very turned off and found patient to interpersonally repulsive, this was condidered a predictable, objective sign of the psychiatric disorder. it’s like, the horrendous smell of shit is a sign that shit might be nearby. that’s subjective, yet it’s also objective.

taibbi is a master at weaving together objective facts and subjective reality.

********************

I’ll tell anyone who cares to pay attention that Taibbi is a global treasure.

.