Not strictly related to business, but I hope there are high income people here who can help.
>go to website of any major news organization
>human interest stories
>viral videos
>some irrelevant politician said or did something mean
>slang
>so much bias they don't even hide it anymore
I assume super-wealthy people don't read these garbage tabloids. Instead they must favor publications which offer academic-style analysis of important world events, particularly those which relate to the global balance of power between nations or shed light on the dealings of major international banks. Do such publications exist, and if so, can you name some? (I don't care if they cost a subscription fee, I'm just curious.)
>>1193633
elites make the news you utter fucking feeb.
>>1193633
/pol/
>>1193645
So? They need some concise way of knowing what their fellow elites are up to. Why shouldn't the elites need journalism just like everybody else?
>>1193656
the markets are faster than all the journalists
They are in the market right next to their contemporaries
and a personal network
>>1193656
Wall Street Journal my man
>>1193660
>the markets are faster than all the journalists
And how does that work exactly? Are you saying that insider trading is ubiquitous and the very few people unlucky enough to get caught (like Martha Stewart) basically just won the reverse lottery?
>>1193674
Martha Stewart got caught because she was connected but not connected enough. If it had been any other high end insider trading deal, it would have been concealed under so many layers with so many lawyers arranging the deal that it would have been almost impossible to prove who was doing what. She was dumb enough to trust her broker (who was also the broker of the executives of the company whos shares she owned). When all the top executives and Martha Stewart dump shares at the same time, the feds get really interested. They used her as an example that they will go after anyone, even a sweet motherly figure.
>>1193645
/thread
many elites rub elbows with politicians and find out (kinda) what's really going on.
Also they read the Wall Street Journal
>>1193708
>it would have been concealed under so many layers with so many lawyers arranging the deal that it would have been almost impossible to prove who was doing what
At what point does information stop being non-public? Does the law actually define this? If so many people are on the grape vine, it might as well be considered an open secret.
>>1193661
Man, 20 years ago I would agree but the wsj sucks dick now. Better than most but still going down hill. I think journalism in general has lost most of integrity these days. That's why gamergate pissed me off, journalism is rampant with liars and all they cared about is their stupid ass video game reviews.
Fight the elite, with thee elite
I'm assuming unless they're an "elite" who is on the council for foreign relations or some other international committee they are probably just more focused on tending to their shekels. And then of course if they are on such a committee then word would just kind of get around, kind of like how everyone knows everyone's business in high school.
Who /bloomberg/ here?
>>1193744
Ya the law defines it. Non public information is semi-loosely defined as:
>any information that has not been previously disclosed and is not otherwise available to investors generally. Filings with the SEC and press releases are generally regarded as public information. Information about undisclosed financial results or a possible merger, acquisition or other material development, whether concerning the Company or otherwise, and obtained in the normal course of employment or through a rumor, tip or just “loose talk”, is not public information. Information should be considered “non-public” until the beginning of the third (3rd) Trading Day (as defined below) after such information has been disseminated widely to the general public through press releases, news tickers, newspaper items, quarterly or annual reports or other widely disseminated means.
al jazeera
>>1193732
They also censor more than read. When the Nazis got into power they didn't shut down news outlets, they even made a few more but all were controlled by censors directed by a central office. Why when their troops were getting slaughtered on the Russian tundra not a German in the fatherland had a clue until well after the fact.
AP and Reuters control about 99% of what goes on the international wire now since the 70's. 2 censors required lol.
>>1193797
Funny enough you're allowed to know these things just not to act on them.
>>1193860
Maybe in 2007. AlJazeera turned into straight up leftist propaganda. Half the shit was always just human interest garbage anyway.
>>1193633
>where do smart successful fancy rich pretty people get their news
1) They are born rich or born attractive and social, in which they don't care about the news, because they are self-absorbed. OR, they have other people/friends/fans/agents/producers telling them the news.
2) Everyone else who is rich but intellectual...
it's called a book. You read books. History, political, science, journalism, all can be found in things called books.
Anything that has a screen exists for the sole purpose of turning you into a retarded faggot.
t. retarded faggot who reads the new york times and /pol/ kekekek
>>1193633
/pol/
>>1193633
FWIW I'm salaried at $230k at 29 as a specialized healthcare consultant, come to 4chan every now and then to relive my first year of college when I migrated from Gaia and Something Awful to /b/. I both went to school with and know "elites" who are at the decision level of entities like the World Bank and have allegiance to no country.
The Economist is a baseline news source - for example I recently spoke with an Ethiopian girl raised in the USA who lives in Switzerland and we discussed the problems with government oversight of Nigerian oil profits.
Financial Times is a good source for straight shooting elites.
The books of the NYT columnists, like Krugman and Dowd, are significantly influential and read.
A hallmark is elites will listen to anyone with a pedigree with a strong opinion that aligns with a globalist view. Nationalism is regressive because it impedes the flow of money.
You posed a good question OP.
Wittgenstein and Popper are both very popular as well, I've discussed them many times at parties.
Anyway bottom line is life is who you know and don't be a sperglord. I migrated from Something Awful to make fun of y'all.
Btw saw some WSJ recommendations, absolute American nationalist garbage and a conservative rag, surprised anyone would recommend it. I would never admit to reading it amongst my peers.
>>1193650
>>1194378
>American nationalist garbage and a conservative
you dont spend much time here, dont you?
you defined /pol/ with this sentence and they have been slowly creeping out of their containment board for quite some time now
conservative right wing bullshit is becoming a norm here
>>1194378
>Popper
Why the fuck would Popper be popular? Are we talking "scientific method" Popper?
>>1193656
>They need some concise way of knowing what their fellow elites are up to.
If you're talking global elite.. doubtful. What any individual is 'up to' at that level is pre-planned in private, closed door meetings. The only so called news to them is when someone isn't following the plan. Which as someone outside of the club you're not going to see anything about it from any source for public consumption since they own them all. You may read about the fallout which will have already been filtered through their spin machine by that point. That's about it.
Beyond that - books. History, science, the arts, etc.
Everything else is for entertainment purposes I'd imagine.
>>1194378
>"elites" don't read the Wall Street Journal
Top kek. I did an internship at a middle market investment bank and pretty much everyone there had a copy of either WSJ or FT; the same was true at bulge brackets I was being interviewed at. Hell, at one interview a VP asked me what recent articles from the WSJ deal journal caught my eye.
>>1193633
I come from a wealthy family and know many "elites"-some I know very well, most are just people I know and would shake hands with at a party or something. The most common publications I've seen are:
>The Spectator
>Wall Street Journal
>Financial Times
>The Economist
>The Times
I'm from the UK btw which is why there aren't many US publications.
>>1194378
>A hallmark is elites will listen to anyone with a pedigree with a strong opinion that aligns with a globalist view. Nationalism is regressive because it impedes the flow of money.
I'm sure they'll all be happy with their extra money when the Third World hordes storm their estates, waving Soviet Union flags.
>>1193633
Direct contact with their network, bloomberg terminals, WSJ for conservative themed special interest, culture for upset middle class, and boomer memes.
Really though, most get their news through their network. If you're high enough up in an f500, you're rubbing elbows with other f500 execs on a pretty regular basis (weekly, if not more), due to the exclusive nature of the club that you're a part of. Country Club chats, executive retreats/training, professional associations and social media all play a huge role.
>>1194378
You're clearly not American. WSJ is ubiquitous in board rooms over here.
>>1194716
>upset middle class
Obviously meant upper middle class
>>1194378
>Elites are all globalist regressive leftists
Know how I know you're making this up?
>>1194716
>all f500 ceo's are good buddies and exchange information with the competition
No. The news originates from somewhere and f500 CEO's aren't omniscient.
>>1194378
>Krugman
>not reading the WSJ because its "conservative"
>The Economist, which mainly provides in-depth analyses on certain news topics, is for "baseline" news
>Ethiopian girl raised in the USA who lives in Switzerland and we discussed the problems with government oversight of Nigerian oil profits.
>Wittgenstein and Popper
> I would never admit to reading it amongst my peers.
You're trying too hard. You probably come from a middle upper middle class background and confused yourself and your friends for "intellectual elites."
>>1194378
FT reader here. I can vouch for that.
The Financial Times provides solid commentary that really helps color the week. It gets hard reading sterile reports all day.
Otherwise, get the news from the actual sources: government bureaus and private data processing firms.
Here's a freebie: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/jolts.nr0.htm
>>1193794
The golden gooses read that. Elites don't like how fast the facts scroll.
I reckon they read media clippings and tailor-made analyses and such publications.
I read global news on Reuters because it runs smoothly on every configuration, and I like to check the pictures of the week during the lunchtime. For more specific news, I often just read on a Bloomberg terminal.
bump, very nice thread
>>1194004
If you are CEO or CFO, then you pretty much have to know what your company is going to do, before the press release.
>>1195671
Obviously, but I'm talking about in general. If a CEO told me that their earnings were tanking and the report next week would reflect that, there's nothing wrong with me knowing that. It's just illegal for me to use that knowledge to short the company.
>>1194386
>/pol/'s views align with those of the wall street journal
spot the newfag
>>1193633
Take market news with a grain of salt.
And 80% of the time, do the opposite.
>Where do the elites get their news?
Over the phone with their buddies, you fucking moron 13 year old.
Stay pleb /biz/
infowars
>>1194386
>Wahhhhhhh the world I live in doesn't have a 100% liberal bias.
>Wahhhhhhh my anime forum isn't pro-socialist!
>Wahhhhhhh Americans have always been better than any European country but I'm using "American" as a pejorative to make me sound intellectual!
>Wahhhhhhh /pol/ is just some containment board even though it hosts a variety of opinions and world views.
>Wahhhhhhh maybe if I say "conservative right wing bullshit" it will make my position look better without actually giving any real insight as to what I believe simply because I'm a brainwashed pseudo-intellectual.
Don't worry, guy. I remember my junior year in high school too. One day, you'll grow up, maybe go to college, work a job, etc. Perhaps you might even write your first three political science undergraduate paper where you get to do actual research from Wikipedia.
People with an IQ that is one standard deviation below the mean (such as yourself) should just be gassed already.
>Wahhhhhhh people with different opinions offend me!
Jesus, underage fags are cancerous.
>>1196422
Take it easy, burger, all that clapping is gonna give you an angina episode
>>1196422
Dubs of truth
>>1194386
> been slowly creeping out of their containment board for quite some time now
Where do you think you are?
I'm serious, where do you think you're posting?
