TV News
View allAll Photos Tagged CNBC
Abstract view of 10 Fleet Place, off Limeburner Lane, near London's City Thameslink station.
Designed by Skidmore Owings & Merrill, and completed in 1993, the building is composed of black steel, glass and black granite cladding. In style it is a modernist twist on gothic architecture, and slightly reminiscent of HR Giger's designs. it currently holds European offices for the Wall Street Journal, CNBC and Dow Jones International. In 2015 the building changed hands for £155m, a 50% mark up on its 2005 purchase.
Taken with a Nikon D40, fitted with a Nikkor AFS DX 18-55mm F/3.5-5.6G II lens, and processed in Picasa, GIMP, and Photoscape.
Stock market reporter on TV. Kelly Evans on 'Power Lunch', CNBC television program. The stock market is a structure built out of playing cards precariously balanced together.
Rebecca ("Becky") Quick is an American television journalist/newscaster, co-anchorwoman of CNBC's financial news show Squawk Box. Allen & Company 2015
Andrew Ross Sorkin is a Gerald Loeb Award-winning American journalist and author. He is a financial columnist for The New York Times and a co-anchor of CNBC's Squawk Box. He is also the founder and editor of DealBook, a financial news service published by The New York Times. He wrote the bestselling book Too Big to Fail (2009) and co-produced a movie adaptation of the book for HBO Films.
Andrew Ross Sorkin is a Gerald Loeb Award-winning American journalist and author. He is a financial columnist for The New York Times and a co-anchor of CNBC's Squawk Box. He is also the founder and editor of DealBook, a financial news service published by The New York Times. He wrote the bestselling book Too Big to Fail (2009) and co-produced a movie adaptation of the book for HBO Films.
Julia Chatterley, Anchor and Correspondent, CNBC International, United Kingdom speaking during the Session: Redesigning Humanitarian Action: Beyond the Crisis at the Annual Meeting 2017 of the World Economic Forum in Davos, January 18, 2017
Copyright by World Economic Forum / Sikarin Thanachaiary
UPDATE: here is the clip :)
video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000035723
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Original post:
Tomorrow night on the Suze Orman show you will find out what Suze herself thinks of Blythe dolls.... Warning: It sounds like we should be prepared to not like what we hear O.O
It will air tomorrow, Saturday July 30th at 9pm PST.
One of my wonderful and loyal fans called in to the show to ask Suze if she could afford a OOAK Melacacia Art Doll.... Apparently for this portion of the show Suze either says "yes, you can buy that item" or she simply says "DENIED".
We will find out tomorrow what Suze says!
__________________________
From yesterday's CNBC and the TV segment on PBS, in their Nightly Business Report with Josh Lipton.
It started with the space collection of Apollo artifacts. I wanted a moon rock to go with it. And the only legal way to get a moon rock is as a lunar meteorite. So it started with one very specific quest, but expanded a bit over time as I came to learn about the amazing stories each of these time capsules from our early solar system can tell us.
I eventually found the largest known Moon Rock on Earth from the ancient Lunar Highlands, NWA5000 was much larger than any brought back by Apollo. (image below)
And it is beautiful. The matrix looks like a black and white intaglio print of the universe rendered by a spirited yet masterful artist. This stone contains breccias within breccias, and the preferential orientation of clasts (from impact compression on the moon) lends a unique 3D appearance to flat surfaces. A generous amount of 4.5-billion year old gleaming metal is present, adding yet another striking element to nature’s artwork.
Only 0.2% of meteorites are from the moon or Mars, making them more rare than pure diamond on Earth.
International Monetary Fund Managing Director Christine Lagarde (3rd L) is joined on panel by Amina Mohammed (2nd L), Deputy Secretary General, United Nations; Muhtar Kent (3rd R), CEO, Coca Cola; Siv Jensen (2nd R), Minister of Finance, Norway; Winnie Byanyima (R), Executive Director, Oxfam International and moderated by Sara Eisen (L), CNBC Anchor “Worldwide Exchange” at the IMF Headquarters April 20, 2017 in Washington, DC. IMF Staff Photograph/Stephen Jaffe
CNBC correspondent, Morgan Brennan, gives a thumbs up from the backseat of the T-50A. lockheedmartin.com/t50a
Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema have become anathemas to liberals, people of color, and anyone who believes all Americans deserve equal access to the institutions of this country. They aren’t the only ones, but they’re front and center for their refusal to change filibuster rules allowing a simple majority of the Senate to pass critical voting rights legislation.
Manchin and Sinema stand on the tip of a colossal iceberg of political posturing, spin, and dishonesty. At the end of last year, Washington Post opinion writer, Perry Bacon, Jr. wrote, “In basically every major institution in America, there are powerful figures who I doubt voted for Donald Trump but nonetheless play down the radicalism of the Republican Party, belittle those who speak honestly about it or otherwise act in ways that make it harder to combat that radicalism.” His list includes Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg, retiring Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, NBC’s Chuck Todd, Harvard Law professor Noah Feldman, and even former acting Obama solicitor general Neal Katyal. All of them “elites” in their fields.
Bacon offers many reasons these and others are not calling out the Republican Party for their outlandish and overt power grabs, their lack of any substantial legislation (even when they were in power), and for their support of “The Big Lie.” But he culls it down to elites wanting to remain elites: to put their best interests above the American people’s.
When we talk about women’s rights (and the right to choose whether to have an abortion), institutional racism, and income inequality, the Republicans aren’t the only bad actors. The self-interest of the American aristocracy in academia, the judiciary, and the media is also problematic. We also have a systematic dilemma. Our founders designed our political system for compromise.
Here’s the Problem
During the 1787 Constitutional Convention, larger states wanted representation based on population, while smaller states wanted equal representation in Congress, fearful of abuses of power. Each side vowed to veto the Constitution if it didn’t get its way. Enter The Great Compromise, which is the foundation of our government today.
Proposed by Connecticut statesmen Roger Sherman and Oliver Ellsworth, they suggested a bicameral legislature, the House of Representatives and the Senate. A state’s population would determine the number of its representatives. In contrast, regardless of its size, each state would have two senators chosen by its legislature (in 1913, the Constitution’s 17th Amendment changed that to allow voters to elect senators directly). In addition, voters wouldn’t elect presidents directly but through electors to the Electoral College.
Our founders never envisioned the considerable disparity in states’ populations we have today (California has 68 times the population of Wyoming, yet each has equal votes in the Senate). Smaller states have a disproportionately more significant say in Congress. This also skews the balance in the Electoral College since the number of electors in each state is based on their total number of representatives and senators. Also, when our country won its independence, only White landowners could vote, further skewing fair representation. The 15th Amendment gave Black men this right in 1870. But this is still being contested today by Gerrymandering and state laws that impede minority rights. And women weren’t given the right to vote until the 19th Amendment in 1920. And, like racial discrimination, we are still dealing with gender inequality.
Early decisions about states’ rights versus the federal government’s rights also affect our ability to pass legislation today. The 10th Amendment states, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” In disputes between the states and the federal government, the Supreme Court can upend this balance by its interpretations of the Constitution. And with many accusing justices of being political activists, the line between states’ and federal rights has become even more clouded. Texas’ law severely limiting abortion is on the Supreme Court’s schedule. And many are concerned that the conservative-leaning court will rule for Texas, even though Roe v. Wade has become established law. Our country’s balance of power has shifted in ways our founders could not have envisioned.
We the People
What do the American people want? In 2014, Princeton Professor Martin Gilens and Northwestern Professor Benjamin Page conducted a study of almost 1800 instances between 1981 and 2002, where public opinion was clearly in favor of specific policies. Yet, “economic elites and organized groups representing business interests [had] substantial independent impacts on US government policy.” In contrast, “average citizens and mass-based interest groups [had] little or no independent influence.” Lobbyists and the wealthy have more leverage on policy than average Americans, even though they represent a small percentage of the population.
Matt Grossman, Director of the Institute for Public Policy and Social Research and Professor of Political Science at Michigan State University, says, “We have status-quo-biased institutions that limit (even popular) policymaking without bipartisan support and wide interest group support.” And, with the Republican Party more interested in retaining power than in compromise, we’re going nowhere. As former Senator John Edwards made it clear during his 2008 presidential campaign, “You cannot negotiate with political thugs.”
Grossman states, “Democrats are closer than ever to supporting institutional changes that would make the status quo more vulnerable, but they would probably need a sustained large national majority (that isn’t forthcoming) to implement them because many of the pivotal elections are on conservative ground.” Without consensus, our arrested status quo remains. Politicians ignore the will of the people. This is the failure that Manchin and Sinema represent.
Are We Headed For a Civil War?
In his 1991 book, Revolution and Rebellion in the Early Modern World, sociologist Jack Goldstone compared “‘selfish elites’ who ‘protect their private wealth, even at the expense of a deterioration of state finances, public services, and long-term international strength,’ as a troubling parallel to the preconditions of the French Revolution, the English Civil War and similar examples of state breakdown.” Working with mathematician Peter Turchin, they have suggested that the United States could be heading towards a civil war.
As early as 2010, Turchin predicted that 2020 would be a chaotic and violent year. Writing in the publication Nature, Turchin said, “In the United States, we have stagnating or declining real wages, a growing gap between rich and poor, overproduction of young graduates with advanced degrees, and exploding public debt. Historically, such developments have served as leading indicators of looming political instability.”
Goldstone and Turchin suggest what is apparent to many of us: “inequality, selfish elites, and polarization have crippled the ability of the US government to mount an effective response to the pandemic, hampered our ability to deliver an inclusive economic relief policy, and exacerbated the tensions over racial injustice.” In mid-2020, Goldstone predicted that instability would increase if Republicans or Democrats contested the presidential election. And that’s precisely what happened. Trump continues to push “The Big Lie” of election corruption.
The non-profit Fund for Peace’s Fragile States Index tracks these indicators and countries’ ability to cope with shocks to their systems. This index shows America’s ability to do so is deteriorating. Out of 179 countries studied, the US comes in at 143.
Looking Ahead
In Paul Rosenberg’s commentary, The center cannot hold: Manchin and Sinema are wrecking America — here’s how to beat them, he and Goldstone agreed, how can you achieve bipartisanship when the Republicans aren’t interested, and Senators Manchin and Sinema continue to say that bipartisanship must be achieved?
Progressives are getting the blame for this breakdown. But as Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said on MSNBC’s 11th Hour, “Biden has governed pretty much exactly the way [moderates] have asked him to. But the problem is that the way they have asked him to govern has been to slow down, not do too much, and we are now seeing the political consequences of not directly improving people’s lives quickly.” Manchin, she says, changes his mind every day. He and Sinema even blocked the voting rights bill, legislation they co-sponsored.
Former US secretary of labor Robert Reich asks why these two senators demand bipartisanship when they knew this wouldn’t happen? Why couldn’t they support a change in the filibuster rules to pass the voting rights bill when they had just agreed to change the rules the month before allowing Democrats to pass debt ceiling legislation? He says that part of the reason is a large amount of cash they’re receiving from special interests (much of Sinema’s coming from Republicans). But the most straightforward explanation is simply ego:
Before February of last year, almost no one outside West Virginia had heard of Manchin, and almost no one outside Arizona (and probably few within it) had ever heard of Sinema. Now, they’re notorious. They’re Washington celebrities. Their photos grace every major news outlet in America.
This sort of attention is addictive. Once it seeps into the bloodstream, it becomes an all-consuming force. I’ve known politicians who have become permanently and irrevocably intoxicated. I’m not talking simply about power, although that’s certainly part of it. I’m talking about narcissism—the primal force driving so much of modern America but whose essence is concentrated in certain places such as Wall Street, Hollywood, and the United States Senate.
Manchin and Sinema are blocking critical institutional change for their own selfish purposes.
So what can be done?
The Washington Post’s Perry Bacon, Jr. suggests three possibilities:
President Biden should issue as many executive actions as he can. David Roberts, author of a newsletter on clean energy and politics called Volts, suggests Biden should sign so many in quick succession, the right-wing media would have no time to make up lies about them, and the Supreme Court couldn’t hear them all.
Biden should use his informal power aggressively. “He can visit the headquarters of companies that pay their blue-collar workers a decent wage and offer parental and sick leave, encourage Americans to purchase products from these companies, and urge other businesses to emulate them. He can implore others to adopt and support initiatives that are meaningfully improving Americans’ lives right now, such as the privately funded universal basic income program happening in the Atlanta area or the historically Black colleges that are forgiving the loans of some students.”
Biden should leverage his popularity and influence in blue America. Forget bipartisanship. Stop trying to compromise with Republicans and conservative Democrats. “In many ways, Biden is the president of only blue America, but that’s more than half of American adults, 70 percent of the United States’ gross domestic product, the vast majority of its big cities, its most populous state (California) and virtually the entire industries of education, entertainment, Big Tech, and philanthropy. Instead, he suggests talking with people like “MacKenzie Scott, Melinda Gates, Ford Foundation head Darren Walker, LeBron James, Oprah Winfrey, and others with money and influence who are likely to embrace causes that Biden points them toward.”
Both Senators Manchin and Sinema are gambling our lives away. If they continue to throw snake eyes, we’ll all lose. By refusing to pander to their egos, Biden can open the way for significant governmental change. Americans voted for Donald Trump in 2016 because his message was anti-establishment. We were sick of decades-old election promises that never materialized. The GOP isn’t interested in bettering Americans’ lives. They just want to win. But if we’re going to change the status quo, we’ll need to take a vastly different approach. And time is running out.
Feel free to pass this poster on. It's free to download here (click on the down arrow just to the lower right of the image).
See the rest of the posters from the Chamomile Tea Party! Digital high res downloads are free here (click the down arrow on the lower right side of the image). Other options are available. And join our Facebook group.
Follow the history of our country's political intransigence from 2010-2020 through a seven-part exhibit of these posters on Google Arts & Culture.
The nation's 45th president will face complex fiscal and economic realities. In just eight years, interest on the national debt will become the third-largest "program" in the federal budget. What steps can the next president take to ensure we have the resources necessary to invest in critical areas of our economy? In this session, we heard directly from economic policy advisors to the presidential campaigns — Sam Clovis (above), National Co-Chair and Chief Policy Advisor, Donald J. Trump For President, Inc. and David Kamin, Economic Policy Advisor to Hillary For America — who will tell us how their candidates are preparing to address America’s unsustainable fiscal outlook and secure a strong economy of the future. Interviewed by John Harwood, chief Washington correspondent, CNBC, and political writer for The New York Times.
Watch the video: youtu.be/YYcMFotufQI
Moderator Geoff Cutmore of CNBC leads a CNBC Debate on the Global Economy with panelists, Agustin Carstens, Nadia Calvino, Ray Dalio, MD Kristalina Georgieva, and Zhu Min, at the IMF Headquarters during the 2019 IMF/World Bank Annual Meetings, October 17, 2019 in Washington, DC. IMF Staff Photograph/Stephen Jaffe
The CNBC video interview with Josh Lipton, and sections filmed live from Planet.
Photos of various artifacts from our space museum at work: DFJspace.com
International Monetary Fund Managing Director Christine Lagarde (3rd L) is joined on panel by Amina Mohammed (2nd L), Deputy Secretary General, United Nations; Muhtar Kent (3rd R), CEO, Coca Cola; Siv Jensen (2nd R), Minister of Finance, Norway; Winnie Byanyima (R), Executive Director, Oxfam International and moderated by Sara Eisen (L), CNBC Anchor “Worldwide Exchange” at the IMF Headquarters April 20, 2017 in Washington, DC. IMF Staff Photograph/Stephen Jaffe
The photographer, wearing a COVID-19 mask, votes in the double runoff election for Senate, placing his ballot in a dropbox, outside of the...
Irvin Johnson Building
DeKalb County, Georgia, USA.
2 December 2020.
***************
▶ Despite the shameful, near seditious efforts of Donny tRump and his cabal of quisling Republics, voting remains a right of every American citizen. And absentee voting (via mail or, as here, in a dropbox) is a LEGAL right of every citizen in America and thus, here, in the state of Georgia.
***************
▶ The state of Georgia has not elected a Democratic senator since 1996. On 5 January 2021, that could change. Georgia citizens, voting in two runoff elections, will determine which party controls the U.S. Senate.
▶ Nationally, Republics have 50 Senate seats, while Democrats have flipped one net seat, for a total of 48 seats. If Democrats win both Georgia races in January, the Senate would be divided, 50-50. Under the Constitution, Vice President Kamala Harris would then be the tiebreaking vote, thus giving the Democratic Party unified control of the White House and Congress, allowing President Joe Biden to undo some of the damage wreaked by tRump and his Republic accomplices.
▶ On 5 January, vote for both:
☞ Reverend Raphael Warnock (pastor, MLK's Ebennezer Baptist Church)
☞ Jon Ossoff (fellow Lithuanian-American!)
***************
▶ How to vote in state of Georgia
☞ Registration (deadline: next Monday, 7 December)
☞ Request absentee ballot (Absentee ballots can be mailed in or dropped off NOW. But...all absentee ballots must be received by 7 p.m. on 5 January 2021 to be counted.)
☞ Early voting locations (begins 14 December)
☞ Election day, 5 January 2021: voting precinct locations
▶ Democratic Party of Georgia.
▶ Fair Fight Action (Stacey Abrams' organization to fight voter suppression).
▶ Democratic Party of Georgia Voter Protection Line: 1-888-730-5816.
***************
▶ Photo by Yours For Good Fermentables.com.
▶ For a larger image, type 'L' (without the quotation marks).
— Follow on Twitter: @Cizauskas.
— Follow on Facebook: YoursForGoodFermentables.
— Follow on Instagram: @tcizauskas.
▶ Commercial use requires explicit permission, as per Creative Commons.
Andrew Ross Sorkin is a Gerald Loeb Award-winning American journalist and author. He is a financial columnist for The New York Times and a co-anchor of CNBC's Squawk Box. He is also the founder and editor of DealBook, a financial news service published by The New York Times. He wrote the bestselling book Too Big to Fail (2009) and co-produced a movie adaptation of the book for HBO Films.
Moderator Geoff Cutmore of CNBC leads a CNBC Debate on the Global Economy with panelists, Agustin Carstens, Nadia Calvino, Ray Dalio, MD Kristalina Georgieva, and Zhu Min, at the IMF Headquarters during the 2019 IMF/World Bank Annual Meetings, October 17, 2019 in Washington, DC. IMF Staff Photograph/Stephen Jaffe
© 2008 Steve Kelley
CNBC reporter at Wall Street waiting to report on the stock market crisis. I don't watch tv that much so have no idea who this is.
Please view on black and large:
International Monetary Fund Managing Director Christine Lagarde (R) and CNBC correspondent Sara Eisen (L) ask students question after the IMF Managing Director delivered her speech atthe 2016 IMF/World Bank Annual Meetings curtain raiser September 28, 2016 at Northwestern Unversity’s Kellogg School of Management. IMF Staff Photo/Stephen Jaffe
TODAY'S COMMENTARY Monday, May 9th 2005
Tina Brown: Voice for a New Creative Revolution
By Jack Myers
Four days before she announced the closing of her CNBC show, Tina Brown and I met for Lunch at Michael's where she talked about the difficult task of continuing her weekly CNBC program, Topic A with Tina Brown; writing her weekly Washington Post column; being a parent (with husband Sir Harry Evans) of two children (14 and 18); and writing her book Remembering Diana on the legacy of the Princess of Wales. Research for the book, which was acquired by Doubleday for $2 million, will require Tina to commute regularly between her native England and New York, where she has lived for the past twenty years.
Creative People Are Draining Out of New York
She's clearly enthusiastic about her book and is looking forward to spending more time in London. "London feels more creative today than New York," she shared with me over lunch. "Something like the Tribeca Film Festival is great and brings out the energy of New York but the creative action is moving out of New York. We're seeing the results of the mergers of the 1990s playing out in the culture. Money people are finally driving art out of the business. Media gatekeepers," she believes, "need to become more focused on creativity as an economic force. They need to encourage a real boutique atmosphere that supports creativity. Creative people are going underground; pulling up the castle doors; draining out of the city. We haven't had a crazy creative entrepreneur with a vision, like Ted Turner, in the media business for years." Tina is passionate about the challenges resulting from the "tremendous upheaval in our culture with people trying to figure out how they can be creative and smart and yet get around the numbers culture. Creative people feel they have to figure out ways to be creative in the middle of a major upheaval."
Getting the "Big Get"
Tina admitted she loved doing her CNBC show although audiences were comparatively small. "It allowed me to shed light on interesting stories that don't get light elsewhere and that's what I've always done. She acknowledged the frustrations of a low production budget for Topic A, a small "but fabulous and extremely talented" five-person support staff, and limited availability of studio and editing time for the weekly hour. "Even though I couldn't always get the 'big get' of the week, we had great guests -- Tony Blair, John McCain, George Clooney, Annette Benning, Les Moonves -- backed up by other interesting and intelligent people and a format that allowed guests to have a voice. TV requires 'names' but sometimes 'names' are the least interesting guests. The 'big get'- especially if it's a politician - is often saying boilerplate stuff and is not interesting. I'm more interested in content and useful information, and we had a core group of loyal viewers who really appreciated what we did each week. We got tremendous feedback and I think we did bring something different and intelligent to television. The final episode of Topic A will air on May 29, although Tina told me in a follow-up conversation that she expects to return to television. "I'm sure I'll come back. I'm not abandoning TV," she told me.
Panic in the News Business
I observed that Tina focused primarily on content related issues while her Topic A guests would often focus instead on business and marketing topics, and Tina agreed "people keep focusing on the numbers and they are making 'branding' a cult. When is thinking and nitty-gritty old-fashioned creative work going to re-emerge? It's time to re-focus on the non-selling part of the business. The outlets for creativity are shrinking."
Tina believes there is "panic" on the news side of the television business and "the networks are running for their lives," although she commends network TV dramas (her favorite current show is "24") and Fox News, which "has a clear identity and flair."
Sleepy Time for Magazines
"It's also a sleepy time for magazines as a force in the culture," says the soft-spoken publishing veteran. "You don't see magazine companies starting new edgy magazines. The magazines that are doing well are more marketing tools, like Lucky. You don't see magazine editorial making waves. It's the same reason," she observes, "that Broadway is full of Hollywood actors at the moment. They can't get the roles they want in films. Theater and book publishing are the last homes for edgy content."
Noting there are few outlets in television or magazines for long-form journalism other than Vanity Fair and The New Yorker, Tina commented "you have no place to write if you're a good writer and want to write long form narrative. There's no such thing as prestige success in America; just commercial success. There's plenty of photo work if you're a celebrity photographer, but few outlets for serious photo journalism. In television, it's a shame there isn't something like the BBC here. PBS is too timid and has had a loss of creative freedom. " On Topic A, she points out, "I could give historian Thomas Cahill ten-minutes to talk about the Pope rather than the thirty-seconds the news networks gave him, but it still isn't enough. Audiences are hungry for more serious journalism," she argues, noting the success of the Penn Literary Festival for International Writers where "the house was packed for every activity."
Table Hopping at Michael's
Our table was a favorite stop for several table-hoppers at Michael's including Hearst's Cathy Black, Peter Price, Jane Pauley, Esquire's Kevin O'Malley, Bobby Friedman, Gerry Byrne, Bill McGorry, Jake Weisbach of Miramax Books, and producer/novelist Holly Peterson holding a launch copy of WWDScoop. Much of our lunch conversation was about the Cream reunion at Albert Hall ("the Brits are more excited about Cream than the election"); Spamalot and Monty Python (we're both fans); our shared rock 'n roll passions (Steve Winwood, Traffic, Dylan, classic rock); her Vital Voices Global Partnership voluntary work; Tina's children and two cats; and her favorite current movies (The Great Wonderful, Ridley Scott's Kingdom of Heaven).
Tina is a creative icon whose star burned bright as a writer for New Statesman and as a 25-year old editor for the U.K.'s Tatler. She came to the U.S. in 1984 to edit Vanity Fair, where she pioneered quality celebrity journalism, became a publishing phenom and achieved her own degree of celebrity. After eight years at Vanity Fair Tina made a surprising move to The New Yorker, continuing to develop a cult-like group of writers who were given free reign to author lengthy journalistic pieces on diverse subjects. "I've always had the sensibility to shed light on interesting stuff that doesn't get visibility elsewhere," she says. "I miss matching writers to stories and I miss the narrative."
Talk Magazine
After leaving The New Yorker, she launched Talk magazine with publisher Ron Galotti and lead investor Miramax, headed by Harvey and Bob Weinstein. "It was a hairy experience," Tina laughs. "I learned to choose who you go into business with and to do more due diligence." She also noted that business realities overwhelm editorial logic. "It's much better to start quietly, do something like an out-of-town tryout for six issues, and have slow growth. But you need to hype the magazine with advertisers to get them interested. We were hoisted on our own expectations."
Ironically, she points out, the book company that quietly emerged from her venture with Miramax has been very successful with several best sellers and critically acclaimed books. Tina still feels "tremendous loyalty" to The New Yorker; believes Atlantic Monthly "is doing a good job and getting more buzz;" and enjoys The New Republic , which she reads online. She also recommends The Sun, a New York City weekly newspaper that "has really interesting stories and pays attention to culture." She's a loyal reader of articles written by Andrew Sullivan, Sidney Blumenthal, Adam Gopnik, Rick Hertzberg and Ken Auletta, among several others. Her favorite TV commentators are Chris Matthews ("terrific"), Tim Russert, John McLaughlin ("fascinated by his technique"), Keith Olberman ("droll, honest and low-key") and Greta Van Susteren.
The common characteristics among her favorites are their commitment to quality content, their focus on interesting stories, their insights on culture, and their creativity. Tina might someday return to magazine editing and promises to return to television, but it will be on her terms with a determination to let down the castle bridge and open the gates to talented creative people, giving them the opportunity to tell their stories in narrative form. "I have a literary obsession," she admits. "I miss long-form narrative story telling. This upheaval in the culture may last five years and there needs to be outlets for creative people."
Moderator Geoff Cutmore of CNBC leads a CNBC Debate on the Global Economy with panelists, Agustin Carstens, Nadia Calvino, Ray Dalio, MD Kristalina Georgieva, and Zhu Min, at the IMF Headquarters during the 2019 IMF/World Bank Annual Meetings, October 17, 2019 in Washington, DC. IMF Staff Photograph/Stephen Jaffe
The CNBC report suggests with rosegold behind at 1.2M that silver was the most used color, sales for 1.3M purchases. When the figures are appropriate, incorporating in purchases direct from Apple as well as in different nations can see some spectacular sales figures …
The report suggests that A...
www.teudi.com/iphone-se-a-huge-hit-with-3-4m-preorders-th...
Geoff Cutmore, Anchor, CNBC, United Kingdom speaking in the Global Economic Outlook: Is this the End of an Era? session at the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting 2023 in Davos-Klosters, Switzerland, 20 January. Congress Center - Congress Hall. Copyright: World Economic Forum/Manuel Lopez
Moderator Geoff Cutmore of CNBC leads a CNBC Debate on the Global Economy with panelists, Agustin Carstens, Nadia Calvino, Ray Dalio, MD Kristalina Georgieva, and Zhu Min, at the IMF Headquarters during the 2019 IMF/World Bank Annual Meetings, October 17, 2019 in Washington, DC. IMF Staff Photograph/Stephen Jaffe