Clueless TV anchor

CNBC just ran a segment on the issue of whether hedge funds need more regulation. The anchor suggested that the recent news about possible insider trading by a hedge fund highlighted the need for regulation. One guest clearly stopped him cold by disagreeing, explaining that insider trading was illegal under current law no matter who engages in it. We already have all kinds of laws and regulations addressing insider trading violations. These already apply to everyone, including hedge funds. Thus, registration or some other kind of regulation of hedge funds is a completely different, totally unrelated issue from insider trading. They have nothing to do with each other.

The host wasn't able to adjust. All his talking points kept going back to the same question. Finally, he had to end the interview and move on to the next segment. What's a poor journalist to do when all his talking points are rendered irrelevant by the first answer given by one of his guests? We can't very well expect him to say anything interesting without his cheat sheet.