Lisa Pollack of The Financial Times writes about the difficulty in covering the markets when dealing with sources.
“… now picture that someone, or maybe several someones, call you and claim that so-and-so is distorting the market. Now, this is something your readers would be no doubt interested to know. But of course, you need to do more research. Figure out who’s telling the truth. Is this just one angry person with a vendetta (and a trading position to match) or is this the tip of an iceberg?
“If it turns out to be an iceberg, then it’s a matter of serious, justifiable interest. But what if there are only a few people who can verify the allegation? And what if they are only guessing anyway? Should you report on guesses when numbers of guessers are large enough? What is enough evidence, really?
“In financial markets, when there are so many factors at play, how confident can one ever be about what caused a given movement in a stock, yield, or credit spread anyway?”
Read more here.
PCWorld executive editor Gordon Mah Ung, a tireless journalist we once described as a founding father…
CNBC senior vice president Dan Colarusso sent out the following on Monday: Before this year comes to…
Business Insider editor in chief Jamie Heller sent out the following on Monday: I'm excited to share…
Former CoinDesk editorial staffer Michael McSweeney writes about the recent happenings at the cryptocurrency news site, where…
Manas Pratap Singh, finance editor for LinkedIn News Europe, has left for a new opportunity…
Washington Post executive editor Matt Murray sent out the following on Friday: Dear All, Over the last…