Such balmy words he pour’d, but all in vain:The proffer’d med’cine but provok̵
The Inevitable Afterbirth
To learn more about Epsilon Theory and be notified when we release new content sign up here. You’ll receive an email every week and your information will never be shared with anyone else.
Continue the discussion at the Epsilon Theory Forum
Participants
The Latest From Epsilon Theory
DISCLOSURES
This commentary is being provided to you as general information only and should not be taken as investment advice. The opinions expressed in these materials represent the personal views of the author(s). It is not investment research or a research recommendation, as it does not constitute substantive research or analysis. Any action that you take as a result of information contained in this document is ultimately your responsibility. Epsilon Theory will not accept liability for any loss or damage, including without limitation to any loss of profit, which may arise directly or indirectly from use of or reliance on such information. Consult your investment advisor before making any investment decisions. It must be noted, that no one can accurately predict the future of the market with certainty or guarantee future investment performance. Past performance is not a guarantee of future results.
Statements in this communication are forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements and other views expressed herein are as of the date of this publication. Actual future results or occurrences may differ significantly from those anticipated in any forward-looking statements, and there is no guarantee that any predictions will come to pass. The views expressed herein are subject to change at any time, due to numerous market and other factors. Epsilon Theory disclaims any obligation to update publicly or revise any forward-looking statements or views expressed herein. This information is neither an offer to sell nor a solicitation of any offer to buy any securities. This commentary has been prepared without regard to the individual financial circumstances and objectives of persons who receive it. Epsilon Theory recommends that investors independently evaluate particular investments and strategies, and encourages investors to seek the advice of a financial advisor. The appropriateness of a particular investment or strategy will depend on an investor’s individual circumstances and objectives.
What translation of the Aeneid is that?
Also, the quotes at the beginning and the mention of “critics” reminded me of:
“‘Tis hard to say, if greater want of skill
Appear in writing or in judging ill;
But, of the two, less dang’rous is th’ offence
To tire our patience, than mislead our sense.
Some few in that, but numbers err in this,
Ten censure wrong for one who writes amiss;
A fool might once himself alone expose,
Now one in verse makes many more in prose.”
The Dryden (and Pope’s always amazing)
Part of what’s going on is that within a couple of weeks after a typical newsworthy event, you kind of run out of new facts to talk about. Things still happen, but only in a slow dribble, not enough to sustain the business model. So coverage gets more and more recursive.
This is the opportunity for Fiat News, the immune system of the status quo, to step in and restore equilibrium. But you know how when you die of the flu, it’s actually the immune response that kills you…
Yes, I think that’s right. I have a separate note in some degree of disarray on this topic more generally, but yes: narrative abhors a vacuum.
Your second analogy is really clever and should have made its way into this note. Ah well!
So, is the decision, after week one or two of coverage, to tell us how to think done by some behind-the-scenes cabal (if so who?) or is it, as it appears, more of a decentralized, instinctual media response, maybe even, with some good intent (but still wrong)?
Also, just an fyi, but sometimes I have to log-on to ET two or three times to get it to “stick” as, sometimes (like today), the system keeps telling me to log-on even after my first and second log-on efforts (from a cloud held password - hence, I didn’t type it wrong).
I think there’s a very difficult line to walk for journalists, and that line is in between Fiat News/Gell-Mann Amnesia-inducing stories/and sufficient context.
For example, a friend of mine covers a state capitol - he generally TRIES to just print facts. But a lot of the time it is impossible to actually understand what’s going on given only “facts.”
The example: The governor promotes a ban on vaping, he does this ostensibly to prevent the death of youngsters. The ACTUAL reason is that he wants to both undercut his more liberal rivals and to ensure campaign donations and support from certain anti-vaping lobbying groups. In addition, if he runs for President he can use his attempt to ban vaping (whether the bill passes or fails) as example of how he’s willing to use the power of the state to save the young ones. But just reporting the “facts” it’s difficult to convey the amoral political motives of such a move. So eventually the story becomes “Shady Governor Makes Power Move to Ban Vaping” to try and get readers to understand what’s actually going on, but which facts alone can’t prove or convey, most of the time.
So I think sometimes narratives arise because journalists are trying to provide adequate context to a story as well.
That was a bad example but, you know, I just made it up so…
It will be interesting to see if the narrative shifts to “well, maybe its not that deadly but it could wreck the Chinese economy” or the world economy for that matter. See Walter Russell Mead in WSJ “the Sick man of Asia”
We’re aware of the (odd) login issue and are working to resolve. Sorry.
I don’t think there’s a cabal. I don’t think it’s a conspiracy. I think well-meaning people with earnest beliefs, when surrounded by people who think the same things, begin to see matters of opinion as self-evident. There is an element of paternalism to it, sure, but I generally ascribe very little ill intent.
Thank you - kind of felt like the soft version to me, too - but I really like your “…see matters of opinion as self-evident” step.
Hey, thinking about the login issue and all the tech issues you’ve had around ET Live! and, as someone who works from home for himself (so am quite familiar with how “small” tech issues can take up large amounts of time), I wonder if the answer to the “missing” tech-driven productivity boom isn’t staring us in the face every day we fritter away time Googling problems, going down dead-end solution streets and calling tech support (a modern hell we all just accept).