Reporter Phil Lebeau in the field, and his colleagues at CNBC global headquarters, literally stood on their stage for the entire day, starting from very early in the morning, and sold GM stock to the public on behalf of whoever was selling it. I feel sorry for the suckers who fell for that story, hook, line and sinker.

I let you know what I thought of it at the time. "Sold to you!" I screamed.

I strongly suggested that the public ought to get the story from the horse, and not the CNBC jockey, because the principals involved " GM and UAW " had an obligation under securities law to make full, true and plain disclosure of their intentions, on a timely basis. Traders have a right to know facts.

CNBC, so caught up in what they do for a buck, often miss the point of securities laws and regulations, which is why I suggest the SEC and/or Spitzer ought to investigate these incidents, and maybe require them to seek registration as a dealer or advisor. Seriously.

In any event, please re-read my article, and then read the AP news report today (published by Yahoo) regarding how close GM and UAW really were to an agreement (not!), and ask yourself whether or not CNBC staff were justified in hyping a figment of their imagination.

In case you don't want to review the whole Week #23 in Review just to find a few sentences on this subject, here is what I wrote:

" On Friday morning, at the same time I bought PDG at $13.90, I sold GM at $35, after catching the market open on CNBC. The selling hype for GM was simply ridiculous. With old file footage, plus some misleading words, and zero evidence to support such wild claims, the CNBC "personalities" pumped the audience with claims that the UAW union would re-open labor contracts and address the healthcare costs issue. If, as and when GM and UAW agree to re-open existing labor contracts, the parties have a duty to disclose. I'm still waiting to hear from the horse's mouth, not the CNBC jockey. If I could re-play the video of CNBC anchors touting GM, I think you too would be ill. That was cheerleading at its best. They even went so far as to extrapolate this nonsense into on-air statements, like "If Ford could do the same as GM;" As GM did what? That reeks."

You know I tell it like it is. And believe me, what CNBC did a week ago today to sell GM stock simply reeked of smarm. To call these people journalists " as they like to call themselves -- is an offense to the profession.

Journalistic integrity would have begun with (i) quoted sources, (ii) confirmation from the participants, and (iii) dates on the file footage of GM and UAW executives shown leaving meetings.

Is that asking too much?