I actually thought Cramer did exactly what he needed to on Friday's Mad Money.
I thought most of the criticisms Stewart had of CNBC ultimately don't apply to Cramer.
Whenever Cramer's on during the hours the market is open, he will point out the bullshit said during interviews that everyone else won't comment on. He'll also point out what he thinks was right about what was said. On his own show, he'll bring CEOs on to talk, and has been burned himself by their lies. Ultimately, some lies said by companies simply can't be identified because a company is no where near as transparent as a government, and never can be. He thinks all of CNBC needs to work on better unearthing the lies CEOs make. He has in the past voiced his criticism of this on his own. So what else can he say on Stewart's show other than to say he didn't do it well enough and will do more?
The other criticism, that he is trying to hurt his viewers through some scheme he has with the CEOs, also seems unlikely. Yes, he worked for a hedge fund and 'worked for the devil' if you really believe in this 'good' and 'evil' in the market stuff. If there was some massive conspiracy, he wouldn't voice his opinions on issues like the uptick rule and mark-to-market accounting (but you try explaining those to Stewart's audience in the time and pressure Cramer had). In the video clips Stewart had, he was being his brutally honest self, who speaks regardless of any moral high ground. On his show, he'll speak of the benefits of investments in tobacco companies, loan sharks, and others. Before the recession (and sometimes now still), He was more interested in finding a way for you to benefit from the failure of the government than to fix the government. Their activities aren't illegal (or can't be proven illegal easily). This is what those suggestions to hedge fund managers in those clips were. Those actions he explained within the videos (that he said he'd never mention on tv), he has spoken openly about since the recession started, describing the problems they cause. What else do you want him to do now?
He even addressed the hedge fund issue during the opening of the show, saying hedge fund managers can benefit from the current conditions. He also made clear through sarcasm that people take the evil hedge fund idea too far. They're doing what everyone ought to do; maximize earnings relative to risk under the current 'rules' of the 'game'. Blame the world governments if you don't like the current 'game', they set the rules. Don't blame the hedge fund. The market is a 'game', whether Stewart or anyone else likes it or not. Its a vicious one, and if you can't handle it or don't know how to play it, you should get out. You're automatically admitting defeat that way, but minimizing your loss.
Criticizing him for his buttons and his over-the-top energy though is just dumb, and Cramer made this clear on friday. He's ultimately an entertainer who hopes to educate you on the market, not construct your portfolio for you. He makes it clear at the beginning of every show that his goal is to educate, and makes it clear with his picks that you need to do your own research. He's as much an entertainer as Stewart. It figures that both shows will have viewers that take their respective host's opinions too seriously. Some do take the opinions as more than a hunch on a stock, or a joke on a political figure. There's the other 17 or so hours of CNBC programming for the people who want a serious show on the markets.
Personally, I've never seen CNBC as out to protect my country, or my job, or even my dollar. They're there to be the soap box for whoever has an opinion on the market. I wouldn't mind a bit more commentary and discussion on those opinions, but overall, I like CNBC the way it is.
