Anatomy of a PM pusher's work

Some may agree, some may disagree with the following article:

http://www.thestreet.com/story/11744090/1/the-road-to-bullion-default-part-i.html

That is not the point. Let me list the terms in this article that I would say were inflammatory:

momentous
unlimited money printing
exponential
bankrupt
infinite money printing
death knell
final warning
hyperinflation
inevitable
clueless masses
tulipmania
ignominious
insanity
explosion
plunge
desparate
unlimited money printing
spiral
utter worthlessness
manipulation
banker manipulation
derivatives casino
when will a default occur?
concerted manipulation
destruction of inventories
conclusive evidence of manipulation
magnitude of destruction
no other possible conclusion
inventories plummeted
plunged

This is just the first 2 pages of 4 pages of a 2 part article. My hand got tired.

Now, I am not even debating the validity of the article, but read these types of words and ask yourself if you believe these types of words really belong in a reasoned piece of journalism, or a sensationalistic piece of garbage written ONLY to scare you, (probably into sending the guy money).

To me, these are the types of phrases I look for in either side of the discussion. Once an author has to resort to such scare tactic phrases, I know the type of "author" he is. Look at the words yourself, and try it. No, please do not try to justify a few of the phrases of the article to me, yes there can be cases made for a few of these in isolation. Its when an article is utterly built around scare tactics like this is when I am saying it crosses over from any form of journalism into a self serving diatribe in my mind, (written from any perspective).

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I think the guy just drank six cups of coffee in three minutes and then wrote a string of unrelated words for an hour. I don't even know what he's trying to say. I wouldn't put too much stock in it; it just sounds like the ramblings of a crazy person with a pen.

 

Yeah, pretty crazy stuff. It's an old formula that still works today. Nothing really changes except the new faces that get sucked in.

 

I wonder if they pay by the word, and double for the "medoraman's List"??

And possibly triple for my favorite "conclusive evidence of manipulation"

 

My favorite was "No other possible conclusion". Usually when someone is writing that, it means THEY refuse to see any other relevant facts.

My point in this exercise was just to illustrate how inflammatory many of these articles are when deconstructed, and show everyone how manipulative they are. Like I said, I wasn't even discussing any merits of his case, just how he was making it. If it had been written in an informative manner I may have even agreed with some of it, but as soon as I start seeing phrases piled up like this my BS meter starts going off.

I just hope this causes a few to read such articles in a different light from now on. Btw, this article was a front page listing on Coinflation. I like the site, but find their articles they link to many time be similar to this one.

 

What I see is nothing but word salad.

 

Would you expect the authors target audience to read it without those inflamatory words and phrases? I'm guessing he knows his audience pretty well...

 

I briefly scanned this article. He did get one thing right which is something that I've said many times on this forum.

Investors should not consider that the same factors that drive the price of gold, also drive those of silver and vice/versa. They absolutely don't.

 

I agree. People have to be able to separate analysis from editorial when reading this stuff. There is no harm in it unless people just choose to believe it because it fits their view of what they want to happen.

 

C'mon Fatima,

Chris asked specifically not to defend a point they believe is correct in the article. I am sure everyone could find something they believe is correct. The point is with this this doom and gloom, scare tactic, type of writing, do you think it should be taken as a credible analysis and or reporting.

So what is your opinion?

 

Yeah, he’s using the second most powerful tactic in advertising, FEAR, the first being the word FREE.

 

Oh lawdy - I've had many (respectful) long online arguments with Jeff Nielson.

He's rigid and buggy but preaching to the choir - is that an 'editorial' section of TheStreet.con ?

 

If TheStreet.com was doing hard core investment analysis, they wouldn't have to buy so many adverbs and adjectives and might use a few more numbers. The editorial section can be identified by the parts of speech they use.

 

If TheStreet.con was doing hard core investment analysis, doubt they'd need to republish Jeff's free-rants. But much of his stuff elsewhere read as advertorials for his business. So... IMPROVEMENT!

And is Cramer still throwing chairs on the set? LOL

 

'Exponential' is a word void of bias. I don't think it should be on the list. I also don't think that any of the buzz words listed are a valid reason to ignore ideas.

I tend to be more wary of tactics like trying to go after something other than the subject at hand.

 

I think it belongs on the list because of the way it is used - imprecise but scary sounding [as is the word infinite in the same paragraph]. If the author had used something like X% growth rate instead, the impact of the statement would have diminished and the article would have been more accurate, which clearly was not the intent.

 

Yes, that is the reason it was on the list. "The list" was just the terms off the bat that were being used in an incendiary manner.

Inflexion, the point of this was only to break down how articles can be manipulative. I promise you, if I had read an article written the same way against PM ownership I would feel the same way about it. I simply hate articles using such scare tactics so much I wished to break down such an article that others may have read, (since it was the lead article on coinflation), and demonstrate why I hate them.

 

Those are not buzz words, they are carefully chosen hot buttons designed to get an emotional response from the reader. That is the last thing you want to see in an investment analysis. This is not analysis at all but just a sales pitch. The whole piece is designed to scare. The sad part is some fall for it and get "SCARED" and scared people make very bad decisions.

 

Scare tactics aside, the information in the article has not been addressed in the slightest, and verb usage has nothing to with validity. It's fine if you don't like it, I don't really either, but that's not a good reason to junk the article.

 

Well, the intent of this thread was not to discuss the article really, but to show how authors, (especially those with extremely biased views), will use incendiary language. To me, any author resorting to such language has lost all respect and I refuse to discuss the merits of his works, since he has refused to present the facts in an acceptable manner. In fact, he has intentionally chosen to try to manipulate me with fear, not with his reasoning. I will listen to all kinds of what I would refer to as "drivel" as long as the author respects me enough to try to pursuade me with logic and resoning. I have read articles saying the US is poisoning the water for muslims, that the Chinese communists do the people a favor by not letting them be a democracy, all kinds of things. All of those things I am open to discussing and contemplating rationally, I simply refuse to be bullied with fear by an author.

As such, to me, I refuse to even intelligently discuss his points that aren't dripping with fear inducing phrases. I know you say you wish to do so, but I would warn you that to do so is playing into his game, as reading an article such as this over and over to understand his points cannot help but slant your view from reading such vitriole over and over again.

To a point I agree with your world view Inflexion. I read articles all of the time from news sources outside the US to get different opinions and viewpoints on current affairs. I do draw the line, though, at someone like this intentionally using maybe 100 fear inducing phrases in a 4 page article. He knows what he is doing, and is doing it for a reason. As such, I now know that "TheStreet" generically, and Mr. Jeff Nielson in particular, are sources of information I cannot trust and will avoid at all costs going forward.

Btw, if anyone wishes to hear the end of the diatribe, here is the second part of the article:

http://www.thestreet.com/story/11748456/1/the-road-to-bullion-default-part-ii.html

Btw, I am surprised no one has called me out on my use of incendiary phrases to discuss Mr. Nielson's articles. I figured someone would. I did it to show my level of disgust with his writing, he did it to try to scare the reader to invest money the way he wishes them to. I think they are different reasons....