In Slate:

But the more I thought about Cramer, the more I realized that pointing out that he gives terrible investment advice would be like pointing out that the sun rises. Worse, I would be dismissed as a wet blanket who didn’t get that the point of Mad Money was just to have a bit of ironic fun. I mean, of course Jim Cramer gives terrible investment advice—we all know that, right?—and we only watch the show because, well, because he does possess a certain bizarre type of market and entertainment genius—if there’s a pundit out there with more opinions about more stocks, I’ve never seen him—and he’s irreverent, madcap, and, yes, even brilliant, in an idiot-savant, freak-show sort of way. (Moreover, Cramer is mesmerizing reality TV. Admit it: You watch because you wonder if this is the night he finally has a heart attack, kills someone, or explodes in a tirade of expletive-laced slander.)

That is precisely why I watch Mad Money, and I love watching the show (though I can never stomach a full episode at a time). I think CNBC personalities are awesome, and although Jim Cramer is great in small doses, he’s nothing compared to personal finance guru Suze Orman, who will help you fix up your crappy finances and crappy relationships at the same time.

Categories: Business and Economics, Entertainment Media, Information Asymmetries, Information Markets, Television