I was planning to publish our first major investigative piece today.
But two things happened Friday that led me to add one more step to the process. First, an attorney for the company at the center of our debut story politely noted that we could be sued, or even face "criminal liability'' if any of the contents are false or misleading. No surprise there.
Then, I did a live interview with Report on Business Television, a Canadian cable channel similar to CNBC. The biggest stumper the anchor asked, in reference to our mission of exposing questionable activity, was who will be monitoring my behavior. I responded that Sharesleuth.com would be a transparent operation; that we'd link to evidence used in our stories, that we'd disclose any conflicts and that we'd let readers make their own judgments. But he raised an interesting point. I'm a one-man operation at this point, acting as both reporter and editor.
Over the weekend, my partner Mark Cuban and I settled on a plan that addresses both of those issues. We're going to pay an independent fact checker to review our stories and ensure that the details are correct and the conclusions are neither false nor misleading.
That means the publication of the first piece will be pushed back a few days. However, the story will be even stronger as a result.
Thanks for your patience, and for keeping the story tips and site suggestions coming.
July 31, 2006 3:30 PM
While I'd like to see your first post, I agree with you that a third-party vetting process is in order. Still, I can just imagine what your legal fees will be for the next twelve months!
August 1, 2006 4:04 AM
Thanks for the updates Chris. Still a big supporter, but one suggestion might be that at risk of losing the following you've built up, perhaps you can post a little more frequently, even if its not directly related to your report. For example, include links to other articles on stock fraud, pyramid schemes, SEC busts etc. which won't require writing work on your end, but still establishes Sharesleuth as somewhat of a compository of information on stock fraud and keeps people coming back. Some of your previous posters ranged from CEOs of publicly traded companies to Securities regulators...you don't want to lose that following. Looking forward to the first article, and can't wait to see the public's reaction when Mark shorts the stock.
August 1, 2006 8:01 PM
Ahh...wimps. I say plunge wildly, blindly ahead. Just use your best guess. And in the interest of posting frequency, feel free to just make things up from time to time. I can see, Chris, how you have more pressure on you to get things right, given that this blog is designed to make and break news rather than aggregate it, as most other are (including my own). You've bitten off a big mouthful but her's hoping to the best. Your friendly neigborhood peanut gallery will be better able to praise or evicerate you once you first report goes live. All the best. Looking forward to publication of your first piece. -- MDT
August 3, 2006 12:16 AM
Chris,
Take your time.
Get all the facts double checked.
Looking forward to the investigative report.
regards,
the_worm06
August 7, 2006 2:41 PM
Yeah, XNL old news. Everyone knows that is a scam. Tell me something I don't know. What's next, CVM? LIV? Come on, these scams are obvious.
Find a stock that everyone in the short community doesn't already know about.
August 9, 2006 11:16 PM
Why not start with that wiley cayote Jim Creamer and his mad money picks. Lets see if can withstand third party scrutiny.
August 10, 2006 6:37 PM
it looks interesting.....You are dealing with an industry (Wall Street) with so many inherent conflicts of interest. Straight non conflicted data is rare.
January 10, 2007 9:59 AM
I'm here in Michigan and have been a loyal fan and follower since your launch. If ever the opportunity, I would love to help participate in building this very useful enterprise.
February 6, 2007 6:19 AM
Tell me what you know about TGOC guys , transglobal Oil.