Reuters blogger Felix Salmon writes about Business Insider and its star, Joe Weisenthal, in the wake of a profile about him in the New York Times Magazine, noting that a recent tweet by Weisenthal calling the jobs data a “DISASTER” explains their success.

Salmon writes, “And in that ultra-fast tweet, Joe managed not only to get out the news of what the number was, he also managed to place it in the context of Wall Street expectations, explain that the number fell short of those expectations, convey the importance of the payrolls report, include a link to a live Business Insider story on the report, and do the whole thing with wry humor. Joe’s ‘DISASTER’ was never meant to be taken literally: hyperbole is his stock in trade, he loves it, and his audience loves him for loving it.

“Business Insider is a bit like a much more honest, much funnier version of CNBC: while other media outlets still work within a tradition of self-importantly handing down the news on engraved stone tablets, TBI is much less reverent — about the news, about itself, about anything really. At its heart, the part of TBI that Joe runs is basically color commentary on the markets — sometimes fast, sometimes clever, sometimes stupid, sometimes profane. It doesn’t matter, so long as it isn’t boring.

“If you care about the markets, this kind of coverage is exactly what you want. Dry reports saying that this went up and that went down are a waste of time: if you wanted to just know what was up and what was down, you could simply look at the numbers yourself much more easily. And quotes from analysts and strategists aren’t much better: their main interest is in looking considered and intelligent, which means that they self-censor and tend to produce boring banalities. TBI, by having no equity in being right, gets to enjoy itself, and reflect the manic energy of a trading floor and the kind of attention span those traders have.”

Read more here.

Ryan Chittum of Columbia Journalism Review writes about the upcoming business news site from The Atlantic called Quartz and questions its strategy of aiming of an elite audience.

Chittum writes, “But it’s disheartening to say the least that to find a business model for business journalism, The Atlantic believes it has to follow the reportorial mob already serving the elite’s elite, the ‘new class of global business executives who have more in common with each other than they do with their countrymen‘ and who want help ‘optimizing their businesses and their lives.’ I mean, isn’t that what McKinsey and personal trainers are for?

“What the post-national elite who run the world really need to read is aggressive, forthright business coverage that pops their gilded bubble, shows them the external costs of their actions, and holds them to account when they betray the public trust, which seems to happen a lot these days.

“Maybe Quartz will do some of that too, but there is zero indication in the press release of any such intention—or that the business universe might be somewhat off-kilter.

“The proof will be in the pudding, obviously, but Quartz is already limited by its own conception of itself.”

Read more here.