Talk:Maria Bartiromo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]

This article needs work? [03:43, 30 April 2005 65.54.154.13]

not anymore. Clinevol98 22:55, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Woah...the last "editor" of this section took out a LOT of info...an unnecessary move.

-Agreed...reverted back to previous page vikramsidhu 13:47, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

First of all, you are "agreeing" with yourself – the Discussion page history gives you away. Second, I mostly rearranged existing material into a more coherent whole. The only thing I took out was a lot of unnecessarily detailed speculation from unsourced "internet blogs" about her future career. Please note that Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. I am reverting back. Wasted Time R 18:54, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

The article indicates that Maria was listed #81 on the FHM 100 Sexiest Women in the World 2003 list. The link points to a Wikipedia article which has Catherine Bell (an actress who bears a resemblance to Ms. Bartiromo) at #81.

[edit] WP:BLP removal (Thomson story)

In another instance of questionable ethics, in 2003 Bartiromo once interviewed Citigroup's CEO, Sanford I. Weill, and stammered that she owned 1,000 shares of Citigroup stock. A number of journalism boards consider it unethical for reporters to own shares in the companies on which they report, and CNBC was later required to redraft its admittedly loose reporting guidelines, which have been described as "boosterish, gossipy and more than a little starry-eyed." [1][2] I just removed the following from the article for now:

The Wall Street Journal and Financial Times reported on 2007-01-24 that the head of Citigroup's wealth management unit, Todd Thomson, was forced to resign in part because of spending company money on functions involving Bartiromo. Thomson was advised by Citigroup executives to reduce his contact with Bartiromo after the two were seen together around Manhattan, the Journal reported. But he spent $5 million to sponsor a Sundance Channel program co-hosted by Bartiromo, and the two flew back together from a business function in Asia on Citigroup's corporate jet. Bartiromo is no longer hosting the Sundance program, but it is rumored that she has flown on Thomson's jet several times, vacationed with him at his private Montana ski lodge, as well as dined with him behind the back of Citigroup's board. Thomson, after gifting $500,000 to the Wharton School in 2004, also had Bartiromo added to the advisory board for a special commission. She and Thomson were then suspiciously co-hosts of a later leadership conference at Wharton in 2005. Speculation continues to run rampant through Wall Street as to the nature of her and Thomson's relationship, but it is possible that her marriage has grown sour over her husband's recent financial hardship and business failure. [3] [4] [5][6] [7]

We do need to cover this story, but this paragraph needs to be a lot tighter. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jimbo Wales (talk • contribs) 03:10, 30 January 2007 (UTC).

[edit] WP:BLP removal (Citibank story)

I also removed this, but I am putting it in a different section here on the talk page, since it is a different issue:

In another instance of questionable ethics, in 2003 Bartiromo once interviewed Citigroup's CEO, Sanford I. Weill, and stammered that she owned 1,000 shares of Citigroup stock. A number of journalism boards consider it unethical for reporters to own shares in the companies on which they report, and CNBC was later required to redraft its admittedly loose reporting guidelines, which have been described as "boosterish, gossipy and more than a little starry-eyed." [8][9]

I think it is not for Wikipedia to make a judgment about "questionable ethics" and this paragraph currently does. Additionally, CNBC was later "required" to redraft some guidelines? Required by whom? And would those guidelines have prevented her either before the redrafting, or even after the redrafting, from owning stocks? Is it really impossible for financial journalists to own any stock? 1,000 shares of Citibank stock would not be a very important asset for someone like Bartiromo, so is this "scandal" really worth of mention?--Jimbo Wales 03:14, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I concur that the "questionable ethics" part is a POV statement, but I don't see why the rest can't be included. What does everyoe else think? I'm in favor of just removing the first paragraph and keepig the rest. Just H 03:20, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Questionable or not, I would like to point out that in her 2001 book "Use the News", Bartiromo stated that she only owned some shares of some mutual funds, and not any individual stocks, as she considered it a "conflict of interest" to do so (I believe the statement was made in the introduction, or possibly the first chapter).

As far as CNBC's guidelines, it was my understanding that certain rules apply to all employees, but stock ownership isn't strictly against the rules. (Originally I was under the impression that Jim Cramer was restricted by either the SEC or CNBC in that he couldn't short a stock, and any stocks he owned had to be held for at least one month. But I read elsewhere, although it may have merely been a Cramer message board, that these rules are imposed on all CNBC employees.) -75.136.202.14 18:19, 8 February 2007 (UTC)