On the Cash: Filtering Noisy Information (September 17, 2025)
How can buyers discover usable sign amidst all the outrageous, algorithm-driven, clickbait? Noisy headlines is usually a distraction out of your long-term targets.
Full transcript under.
~~~
About this week’s visitor:
Michael Hiltzik covers enterprise for the Los Angeles Occasions, is a two-time winner of the Gerald Loeb Award and has authored quite a few books on enterprise.
For more information, see:
~~~
Discover all the earlier On the Cash episodes right here, and within the MiB feed on Apple Podcasts, YouTube, Spotify, and Bloomberg. And discover your complete musical playlist of all of the songs I’ve used on On the Cash on Spotify
Transcript:
Intro: Cum on really feel the noize, Women rock your boys,
We’ll get wild, wild, wild, Wild, wild, wild…
Barry Ritholtz: Buyers face a flood of noisy information, social media, television, radio, and extra. None of it’s tailor-made to you specifically. A lot of it seems to be outrageous, algorithm-driven, clickbait. What’s an investor imagined to do to assist us navigate this?
Let’s usher in Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter Michael Hiltzik. He covers enterprise for the Los Angeles Occasions. He’s a two-time winner of the Gerald Loeb Award, in addition to the creator of quite a few books on finance.
So Michael, let’s begin with this infinite sea of noise. How do you navigate this? How do you prioritize what’s essential and what’s not?
Michael Hiltzik: It was once stated that newspaper readers know how you can learn their newspaper. They kind of assess what they see there, the way it conforms to their very own worldviews, the way it conforms to what they see within the exterior wideworld of actuality.
And I feel that’s most likely extra essential now than it ever has been earlier than newspaper reviews of information are at all times second-order reviews.
It’s a reporter who’s regarded on the knowledge and/or an editor has dropped a web page or despatched an e-mail and stated “Do one thing on this report from this, that, or the opposite.
And I feel you at all times must assess the supply as we’ve talked about. If we’re speaking a couple of commerce group, properly, a commerce group is mainly, a PR group and it’s going to place its personal spin on no matter quantity it’s. It cooks up and generally it places spin on numbers even earlier than they’re cooked up.
If a commerce group is citing a examine from a supposedly impartial group, I wish to know in the event that they commissioned this examine or who commissioned it. And, that’s a combination a part of my evaluation. And I at all times ask, if I’m calling lobbyists and saying, , you simply cited this supposedly third-party, evaluation.
Is it yours? Did you fee this? And, , in the event that they’re trustworthy, they’ll. Don’t inform me.
I simply received one into my e-mail field, I feel simply the opposite day and, and I’ve requested, however haven’t gotten a reply but. In order that’s, that’s essential and, and I feel readers have to grasp that greater than ever earlier than.
Actually, greater than in my lengthy profession. Reporters are overworked, they don’t have the time to do their homework, so they’ll mainly take a press launch from some knowledge supply and regurgitate it. So I feel it’s essential for readers to do what I do, which is to verify the supply and if they will go to the uncooked materials and make a judgment for themselves, and clever buyers ought to be capable to try this.
Barry Ritholtz: That raises an apparent query. How do you inform which sources are reliable? Who do you place in your all star listing? Who do you get rid of?
Michael Hiltzik: Nicely, there are a couple of sources, financial sources who’re on my All star listing. You already know and and your of us ’trigger I quote you with some frequency. There are different organizations which have proven by means of the check of time to have integrity and the way they interpret knowledge.
Then there have been some the place you simply wish to think about what about their ideology, their, their, their funders their historical past and that simply, , these easy inquiries. We’ll inform you a large number about the way you wanna assess data that, that comes at you from all these sources.
Barry Ritholtz: You talked about reporters are pressed for time, so are buyers. You’re type of hinting at, hey, this requires a while, effort, and work with a purpose to work out what’s a reputable supply of dependable information and what is a bit more, let’s simply name it unreliable.
Michael Hiltzik: I bear in mind studying Andy Tobias’s guide most likely considered one of its earliest incarnations the place he stated, “What, what do you do if a dealer involves you, , chilly name or somebody pitches an funding for you?” and what his recommendation was to say don’t spend money on that funding, however see the way it does. And if it’s executed properly, then possibly you wanna hearken to this guypay slightly bit extra intently the subsequent time.
And I feel that that’s kind of a good suggestion extra typically.
You already know, some reviews might be refuted or debunked pretty rapidly, and a few of these sources will compile a report of inaccuracy or dishonesty and a few will compile a report of reliability; it takes time, it takes consideration and Buyers, like readers and reporters have to do their homework, and we simply see that be being increasingly troublesome or simply occurring loads lower than it, than it used to.
Barry Ritholtz: I’ve been noticing what, a minimum of to me, it looks like greater than ever anecdotes and one-off tales and narrative tells, they simply appear to be more and more fashionable. How do you navigate by means of what’s a compelling story? My math associates at all times say. “N=1.” All proper. So you haven’t a knowledge sequence, however that’s one anecdote. How do you handle that?
Michael Hiltzik: That’s proper. And generally the N one is oneself. Principally I’ve at all times been kind of averse to man-on-the-street tales as a result of a person or a lady on the road that’s an N = 1, and you may’t actually at all times inform what questions have been requested, what this individual is aware of.
We’ve definitely seen, , definitely in the course of the inflation of the previous couple of years, we noticed a number of interviews with households through which they talked about how a lot they’re spending on this or that commodity or produce and, and received it completely incorrect. I feel that individuals can kind of.
Examine what they’re studying to their very own expertise and if it’s actually at odds that that’s essential to remember. I feel. I imply, I’ve gone, , I’ve been assigned to do Man on the road, tales. However , after they work, it’s since you, you may have a slim topic and you’re coping with people who find themselves ready to know the solutions to the questions you’re speaking about, however kind of throwing in.
You already know, anyone who’s standing on-line or, , I used to say, I used to be at all times suspicious of tales that quoted the driving force who introduced the, the reporter from the airport to the primary class resort on the town. And we used to see that after I was in Africa. You already know, I might inform the chauffeur was he was labeled to, to cover.
So that you wanna guarantee that if there’s, if there are interviews with people or households or {couples}, that there’s a couple of they usually appear to truly know what they’re speaking about and, they usually’re speaking about their very own experiences and that they sound believable.
These are incorrect. You already know, the kind of checks that we’ve to conduct in our in our each day lives.
Barry Ritholtz: What about social media? How can we keep away from the worst points of algorithmic hype that appears to work its approach into mainstream media as properly?
Michael Hiltzik: Actually mainstream media tales that depend on social media sourcing, very suspect.
Look, I used to be at all times a fan of Twitter. I nonetheless am a fan. I feel Twitter for all its faults nonetheless has a crucial mass that alternate options like Blue Sky simply haven’t fairly reached. You already know with X. As we name it, I feel you may kind of wean out the, the wild nonsense. I at all times appreciated X as a result of I might curate my timeline depend on sources on that platform that, that I had come to know. (It’s increasingly troublesome now and it’s tougher to eliminate a few of the straws. However
You already know, there are web sites that I am going again to over and over.
They’re not all financial web sites. Generally they’re writers who assume the way in which I do. So I, , I get reinforcement the place, the place I want it. After which there are some that I simply ignore. I’m, , I’ve extra time to myself as a result of I’m not paying any consideration to a number of these things.
Barry Ritholtz: I discovered on Twitter. Curating your individual lists on totally different matters. For me, it’s the financial system, it’s knowledge and analytics. It’s behavioral finance. There are consultants on the market speaking about topics that I like, and a minimum of there’s some filtering course of by creating an inventory. It’s not gonna cease spam and different junk stuff from coming by means of.
So we’re speaking about social media. I assume if we’re speaking about information and issues, we’ve to debate AI, not simply the hallucination, however the danger that that information story you’re studying is actually pretend information, simply one thing created by AI cheaply.
How can we navigate a world the place AI is cranking out a number of synthetic intelligence is cranking out a number of information that isn’t precisely following the foundations of journalism?
Michael Hiltzik: I ought to let you know that I’m an AI skeptic. Some giant proportion of AI claims by builders and by purchasers is advertising and marketing in the identical approach that, , dot com was once the large advertising and marketing troop 25 years in the past. So a number of what’s pitched as AI is just not actually AI, and none of it’s intelligence.
I’m of two minds about whether or not individuals are gonna turn into higher at detecting AI creation, or, or worse, I feel in the meanwhile. There are giveaways that anybody can see. Generally within the language that’s used, generally within the photographs which can be created, we see this over and over clearly AI, hallucinations.
Proper now there’s an AI craze in trade and together with within the information trade, and I feel that’s going to be an issue.
I feel it’s going to go unhealthy. And, I feel counting on AI goes to be one thing that once we have a look at it within the rear view mirror, we’re gonna say, what, what had been we pondering? Why did we spend any cash on this?
Barry Ritholtz: So, to wrap up, apply frequent sense to your consumption of reports.
Determine who’s reliable, what sources are correct. Put the effort and time in to figuring out who’s worthy of your time and belief. Be cautious of social media. Be cautious of ai, and don’t be afraid to comply with individuals, who’ve bylines that you simply belief moderately than simply blindly taking note of any specific media supply.
It’s value understanding what you’re consuming and why, and staying on the precise aspect of accuracy. If I’m Barry Ritholtz, you’re listening to Bloomberg’s on the Cash.
