Ghost Education (Part 7)

Terry Lane’s article certainly qualifies as ghost education. Should we have expected anything more?

“About the Author” reads:

> Terry Lane has been a journalist and writer since 1997.

Journalists and writers don’t necessarily know anything about trading.

> He has both covered, and worked for, members of
> Congress and has helped legislators and executives
> publish op-eds in the “Wall Street Journal,” “National
> Journal” and “Politico.”

Op-eds usually have nothing to do with trading: even (especially?) those in the WSJ.

> He earned a Bachelor of Science in journalism from the
> University of Florida.

I wonder if he had to take any finance classes as part of that concentration?

According to Lane’s LinkedIn page, his background includes nothing about trading or finance. He has listed as “Skills:”

Apparently, Lane has no investing background, no background at all in the financial industry, or even specifically the financial media. I wonder if he has ever traded a stock or option contract in his life? It might be bad enough for the average investment adviser with no trading experience to report on this. What the devil is someone completely outside the financial industry doing by trying to report on it?!

I mean nothing against Terry Lane. He seems like a solid writer. He could be a very nice guy, a wonderful family man, and he may be great at what he does: writing and communications.

Lane seems extremely unqualified to be writing any kind of article about trading, though, and that is exactly what his article reflects from a content standpoint. This is ghost education: a subset, in my opinion, of optionScam.com. Many people will read this article expecting to learn and learn they will not. Lane might get hits for Demand Media, which may be his job. To me and the rest of us traders, though, Lane’s content is absolutely meaningless and a waste of our time.