At the Money: Filtering Noisy News (September 17, 2025)
How can investors find usable signal amidst all of the outrageous, algorithm-driven, clickbait? Noisy headlines can be a distraction from your long-term goals.
Full transcript below.
~~~
About this week’s guest:
Michael Hiltzik covers business for the Los Angeles Times, is a two-time winner of the Gerald Loeb Award and has authored numerous books on business.
For more info, see:
Professional Bio
Personal website
Twitter
~~~
Find all of the previous At the Money episodes here, and in the MiB feed on Apple Podcasts, YouTube, Spotify, and Bloomberg. And find the entire musical playlist of all the songs I have used on At the Money on Spotify
Transcript:
Investors face a flood of noisy news, social media, tv, radio, and more. None of it is tailored to you in particular. Much of it appears to be outrageous, algorithm-driven, clickbait. What’s an investor supposed to do to help us navigate this? Let’s bring in Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter Michael Hiltzik. He covers business for the Los Angeles Times.
He’s a two-time winner of the Gerald Loeb Award, as well as the author of numerous books on finance. So Michael, let, let’s start with this endless sea of noise. How do you navigate this? How do you prioritize what’s important and what’s not? Well, uh, you know, it used to be said that, uh, that newspaper readers know how to read their newspaper.
You know, they, they sort of, uh, you know, assess what they see there. Uh, you know, how it conforms to their own, uh, worldviews, how it conforms to what they see in, in. In the outside wide world, uh, of, of reality. And I think that’s probably more important now than it ever has been before. Um, newspaper reports, uh, uh, of data are always second-order, uh, reports.
It’s reporter who’s, uh, looked at the data or, uh, an editor has dropped a, a page or sent an email, uh, and said, you know, do something on this report from. This, that, or the other. Um, and I think, uh, you, you always have to assess the source as we, we’ve talked about. You know, if, uh, we’re talking about a trade organization, well, a trade organization is basically, uh, a PR organization and it’s going to put its own spin on whatever number is it.
It cooks up and sometimes it puts spin on numbers even before they’re cooked up. Uh, if a trade organization is citing a study. From a supposedly independent group, I want to know if they commissioned this study or who commissioned it. And, uh, uh, that, that’s a mixture part of my assessment. And, and I always ask, uh, you know, if I’m calling, uh, lobbyists and saying, you know, you just cited this, uh, you know, supposedly third-party, um, uh, analysis.
You know, is it yours? Did you commission this? And, you know, if they’re honest, they’ll. Don’t tell me. Uh, I just, just one, you know, into my email box, I think just the other day and, and I’ve asked, but haven’t gotten a reply. So, uh, so that’s, that’s very important and, and I think, uh, readers have to understand that more than ever before.
Certainly, you know, more than in my long career. Uh, re reporters are over overworked. Uh, they don’t have the time to do their homework. Uh, so they will basically take a press release from some data source and, uh. Uh, uh, regurgitate it. Um, so I think it’s, uh, important for readers to do what I do, which is to check the source and if they can go to the raw material and make a judgment for themselves, and intelligent investors should be able to do that.
So, so that raises a, an obvious question. How do you tell which sources are trustworthy? Who do you put on your all star list? Who do you eliminate? Well, there are a few sources, economic sources. Were on my All star list. You know, you and, and your folks, you know, ’cause I quote you with some, uh, frequency. Uh, there are other organizations that have shown, uh, you know, through the test of time to have been, to have integrity and how they interpret data.
Uh, and um, and then there were some where you just, um, want to factor in what you know about their ideology, their, um, their, their funders, um, uh, their history and that, uh, just, you know, those simple inquiries. We’ll tell you a lot about how you wanna assess information that, that comes at you from all these sources.
You, you mentioned reporters are pressed for time, so are investors. You’re kind of hinting at, hey, this requires some time, effort, and work in order to figure out what is a credible source of reliable news and what is a little more, let’s just call it unreliable. Well. You know, I think I, I remember, you know, reading, uh, a Andy Tobias’s book, uh, you know, probably one of its earliest, uh, incarnations where he said, you know, what, what do you do if, uh, a broker comes to you, you know, cold call or someone, uh.
Uh, you, you know, and pitches, uh, an investment for you and what his advice was to say, well, you know, don’t invest in that investment, but see how it does. And if it’s done well, then maybe you wanna listen to this guy, or, or, uh, cow a little bit more closely the next time. And I think that, uh, that’s sort of a good idea more generally.
Um. You know, some reports will be refuted or debunked fairly, uh, quickly, and some of these sources will compile a record of inaccuracy or dishonesty. Um, and some will compile a record of reliability. And, uh, it takes time, it takes attention, uh, and, uh, I think. Investors, like readers and reporters need to do their homework, and we just see that be being more and more difficult or just happening a lot less than it, than it used to.
I, I’ve been noticing what, at least to me, it seems like more than ever anecdotes and one-off stories and narrative tells, they just seem to be increasingly popular. How do you navigate through what is a compelling story? My, my math friends always say. N equals one. All right. So you have not a data series, but that’s one anecdote.
How do you, how do you manage that? Uh, that’s right. And sometimes the, the N one is, is oneself, so, so yeah. Well, um, look, basically, um. I, I’ve always been sort of averse to man on the street stories, um, because, you know, a man on the street or a woman on the street that’s, that is, that is an n equals one, and you really have no idea what, you can’t really always tell what questions have been asked, what this person knows.
We’ve certainly seen, you know, certainly during the inflation, uh, era, uh, under, uh, of the last few years, we saw a lot of, uh, uh, interviews with families in which they talked about how much they’re spending on this or that commodity or, uh, or, or produce and, and got it totally wrong. Um, and um, so I, I think that people can sort of.
Compare what they’re reading to their own experience and if it’s really at odds that that’s important to keep in mind. So, um, I, I think. I mean, I’ve gone, you know, I’ve been assigned to do Man on the street, uh, stories. But, um, you know, when they work, it’s because you, you have a narrow subject and you are dealing with people who are in a position to know the answers to the questions you are talking about, but sort of throwing in.
You know, somebody who’s standing online or, you know, I used to say, I was always suspicious of stories that quoted, um, the, uh, the driver who brought the, the reporter from the airport to the first class hotel in town. And we used to see that when I was in Africa. You know, I could tell, uh, you know, the, you know, the chauffeur, you know, sometimes, you know, was he was labeled to, to hide.
But, uh, yeah. So, um, you wanna make sure that you, you know, if there’s, if there are interviews with individuals or families or couples, that there’s more than one and that, uh, they seem to actually know what they’re talking about and, and they’re talking about their own experiences and that they sound plausible.
Uh, these are wrong. You know, the sort of tests that we have to conduct in our, uh, in our daily lives. What about social media? How do we avoid the worst aspects of algorithmic hype that seems to work its way into mainstream media as well? Uh, yeah, well certainly mainstream media stories that rely on social media, uh, um, sourcing, uh, very suspect.
Um, social media. Um, look, you know, I was always a fan of Twitter. Uh, I, I would, I I still do, you know, I still am a fan. I think Twitter, you know, for all its faults still has a critical mass that alternatives like, um, um, blue Sky just haven’t quite reached. Um, so, uh, you know, with, with X. As we call it, I think you can sort of wean out the, the wild nonsense.
Um, uh, I always liked X because I could curate my, uh, my tweet, uh. Uh, timeline, um, and rely on sources on that platform that, that I had come to know. It’s more and more difficult now and it’s harder to, uh, sort of, uh, you know, get rid of, uh, you know, some of the straws. But, um. You know, there are websites that, uh, that I go back to over and over again.
They’re not all economic websites. Sometimes they’re, um, uh, writers who think the way I do. So I, you know, I get reinforcement where, where I need it. Um, and then there are some that I just ignore. Um, you know, I’m, you know, I have more time to myself because I’m not paying any attention to a lot of this stuff.
Yeah. I found on Twitter. Curating your own lists on different topics. For me, it’s the economy, it’s data and analytics. It’s behavioral finance. There are experts out there talking about subjects that I like, and at least it, it, it’s, there’s some filtering process by creating a list. It’s not gonna stop spam and other junk stuff from coming through.
Um, all right, so we’re talking about social media. I guess if we’re talking about news and problems, we have to discuss ai, not just the hallucination, but the risk that that news story you’re reading is literally fake news. Just something created by AI cheaply. How do we navigate a world where AI is cranking out?
A lot of artificial intelligence is cranking out a lot of. News that isn’t exactly following the rules of journalism. Yeah. I should tell you that I am an AI skeptic. Yeah. I think, uh, you know, some large percentage of AI claims by, um, uh, by developers and by clients is, is marketing in the same way that, you know, dot com used to be the big marketing troop.
Sure. Um, 25 years ago now. Um, and so a lot of what is pitched as AI is not really ai, and none of it is intelligence. Um, I’m not sure I, I I’m of two minds about whether people are gonna become better at, uh, uh, at detecting AI creation, or, or worse, I think at the moment. Uh. There, there are giveaways that, uh, anyone can see.
Um, you know, in the, sometimes in the language that’s used, sometimes in the images that are created, we see this over and over again. Just, you know, cl clearly AI, hallucinations. Um, so, uh, uh, you know, right now there’s an AI craze, uh, in, in industry and including in the news industry, and I think that’s going to be, uh, a problem.
I think it’s going to go bad. And, uh, I, I think, you know, relying on AI is going to be something that, you know, when we look at it in the rear view mirror, we’re gonna say, what, what were we thinking? You know, why did we spend any money on this? So, to wrap up, apply common sense to your consumption of news.
Figure out who’s trustworthy, what sources are accurate. Put the time and effort in to identifying who’s worthy of your time and trust. Be wary of social media. Be wary of ai, and don’t be afraid to follow people, uh, who have bylines that you trust rather than just blindly paying attention to any particular media source.
It’s worth understanding what you’re consuming and why, and staying on the right side of accuracy. If I’m Barry Ritholtz, you are listening to Bloomberg’s at the Money.
The post At the Money: Filtering Noisy News appeared first on The Big Picture.
Recent comments