If you have "no place to go," come here!

If Andrew Ross Sorkin is the "Founder" of Dealb%k, then where's the About page?

This is a little incestuous, I mean it would be if I were in Sorkin's family, which I'm not. But this paragraph from one of my guilty pleasures, Gawker, was so delicious I had to share it:

The face of credulity in the media is Andrew Ross Sorkin, hardworking New York Times Wall Street reporter and sometime Wall Street shoeshine boy. You cannot question Sorkin's work ethic. You cannot question his deep connections on Wall Street. And personally, I don't even question his sincerity. I do not believe that Andrew Ross Sorkin is a nefarious, scheming, two-faced spy, sent to do the bidding of Wall Street bankers in the halls of the nation's most important news outlet. I just think he is so dangerously, moronically credulous that his writing constitutes a danger to the public.

What fun! So I went to Dealb%k, a "financial service"[1] from the New York Times, which I never read, and saw the header:

What the heck is a FOUNDER? Silicon Valley's bubble-icious startups have Founders, not newspaper departments. And sites that are "founded" have About pages that explain what they are. So I go to what looks like the masthead for this "financial service":

But Andrew's not there. So I search the Times, and come up with this:

Andrew does rather seem to wear several hats. But the one I'm interested in is the "FOUNDER" hat. How is a "founder," or "founding editor" different from an editor? I suppose another way of asking that question is this: What does the "%" in "Dealb%k" stand for, in terms of Sorkin's business model?

NOTE [1] The fact is from 2006, and is not linked to from the Dealb%k home page. So I frankly don't know whether it's authorititative or not.

header.png55.49 KB
masthead.png234.62 KB
sorkin_bio.png249.13 KB
No votes yet


Rainbow Girl's picture
Submitted by Rainbow Girl on

Lambert, this is a small chef d'oeuvre. If pictures are worth 1000 words, then cartoonish snappy graphics (like this one) are worth 20 paragraphs of text stripping Shoe Shine Boys like Sorkin down to their conflicts-riddled lackeyness. Bravo! More like this please.

I wonder if "Founding Editor" means something like that he went out and got his own funding for this propaganda sub-shack of the NYT from, you konw, VCs? Private Equity folks? And that every word he speaks and writes is thus funded.

It is not outside the realm of possibility.
Remember that other sub-shack of pro-bank/anti-people propaganda at NPR (Planet Money) and its fully-bank-financed Shill in Chief, Adam Davidson? Project S.H.A.M.E. - it was devastating on so many fronts, including that Davidson was not-blaming banks for any of the subprime disaster while Ally/GMAC was Planet Money's sole funder? Ha ha ha.

What is wrong with these people? Correction. What the heck is wrong with the audiences that keep listening, believing and nodding?

Submitted by lambert on

... that I originally discovered as an iPad app. I really like it, and it's a quick way to go meta on Internet artifacts.

And I think Dealb%k is sus. Too many little details are off that you would expect to be right at a large newspaper.

Rainbow Girl's picture
Submitted by Rainbow Girl on

These empty or uninformative "About" pages seem characteristic of sus' outfits. IIRC you had a post about one of the Obama Walking Around Money Entities - CAP? Or one of the money-funnelling shells for ObamaCare. Same thing - either no "About" link or an "About" link with information irrelevant to conveying the people behind the thing, funders and boards.

To be fair, concealing true ownership and control (and source of money) is SOP for setting up companies designed to launder money. So there's that.