Answering to Henry Blodget

Posted by: Diane Brady on May 27, 2008

Reader Jake Zamansky wrote an interesting blog item today about fielding criticism from former analyst-turned-journalist Henry Blodget.

While Zamansky raises some great points about people in glass houses throwing stones (in this case, Blodget questioning the securities litigation lawyer about his transparency), I was struck by his assessment of Blodget. Yes, the former analyst is barred from ever working in the securities industry again because he was touting stocks he had dismissed as crap. But does that mean he’s wrong to have stepped back into the limelight as a blogger/journalist?

“Given his disgraced past, that takes real cajones,” Zamansky writes. Personally, I’m a believer in second acts … and Blodget seems to have done well in this one. What do you think?

Reader Comments

rick

June 1, 2008 2:12 AM

No second act. Blodget, as part of his "stay out of jail free" agreement, said he would not participate in the securities industry again. True to form, Blodget found a loophole in the agreement and is now working in the industry as a journalist. So he is violating the spirit of the agreement if not the letter.

I won't get into all the people he hurt with his intentionally misleading advice.

Post a comment

 

About

How can you manage smarter? Bloomberg Businessweek contributors synthesize insights from the brightest business thinkers, critique the latest management trends, and comment on leaders in the news.

BW Mall - Sponsored Links

Buy a link now!