[eine_zwei]

The reality is that media helps define what is normative and what is not. Describing bad behaviour and abuse of the law, without calling it out as bad, helps normalize it.

Matt Levine's columns often goes one step beyond the "neutral way". They often describe them as cool ingenious schemes done by smart people.

[jrumbut]

I guess it's hard to infer tone in a newsletter, I always saw his descriptions as a use of understatement to really draw out how evil some of these things were or in other cases to pass over the small time crook and focus on the systemic issues.

I can see it the other way too though, now that you mention it.

[civilized]

You realize there's a difference between "the media does (attempt to) define norms" and "the media should define norms", right?

[davidivadavid]

They are cool ingenious schemes done by smart people — who sometimes happen to be criminals.

That's why people watch heist movies and play GTA, too.

Not sure Matt Levine has the power to change what is perceived as cool by western culture.

[Ntrails]

When he talks about the bankruptcy/CDS/default shennanigans (eg Hedge fund offers bailout to avoid default in exchange for ophaning credit etc), he does not take a stance on right and wrong.

Why? Both sides of the game are Informed. This isn't screwing over the dentist, it is fund A outthinking funds B and C. Is it a social good? Don't know, nor does he (seemingly). So why bother pretending