You know how socialist billionaire Warren Buffett wrote that column last week where he said, "cut the coddling shit, government bros—I want to be taxed more," or something to that effect, and just about everybody tweeted it? Yeah, well, Charles Koch didn't like that column very much.

One heroic, honest—too honest Barron's staffer announced that he had bedbugs in his apartment building. Now the entire Wall Street Journal headquarters are on edge. Fearmongering company email, below.

Financial news network CNBC is in a tiff with the financial magazine Barron's, according to a ponderous but awesome story by the Columbia Journalism Review's Dean Starkman. Barron's decided to investigate CNBC meal ticket Jim Cramer, host of "Mad Money," and the network got pissed. The Barron's story began as a look into whether Cramer's stock picks might be leaking before broadcast somehow, which scared CNBC so much that it scurried around spending money on lawyers and sweating until that line of investigation was dropped. The final version of the piece didn't mention that, but it did say that Cramer's stock picks don't generally beat the overall market—not a stunning conclusion to financial types, but poison to Cramer's viewing audience, who watch him with hopes of getting rich. Now the TV network is so mad that it has mostly stopped inviting Barron's reporters onto shows. Starkman comes to the conclusion that both sides made some mistakes, but CNBC is almost totally wrong, while the Barron's story is mostly correct. So why the snippy move to ban the (innocent) reporters from the air? That's the most shine anybody at Barron's can hope for in their day-to-day life. End the embargo! [CJR] Remember: if you upset Jim Cramer, he goes PSYCHO like THIS:

Congratulations, Gawker readers. You are now the voice of conventional wisdom for the financial press. We are so screwed. [Barron's]

• The Bancroft clan gathers today in Boston to discuss whether or not to accept Rupert Murdoch's offer for Dow Jones. "Assuming that all the shareholders outside the Bancroft and Ottaway families favor selling, less than one-third of the Bancroft family's vote is needed to gain majority approval for the deal." [NYT]
  

Leave it to Eric Savitz, dean of the Valley's tech correspondents, to take on Rupert Murdoch. The rest of the media grudgingly sighs as it treats News Corp.'s pending acquisition of Dow Jones as an inevitability. But Savitz — who works at the Dow Jones-owned Barron's dares to ask the forbidden question: What if the Bancrofts, the family which owns a controlling stake in Dow Jones, turn Murdoch down? After asking this question, and exploring what might happen to the stock (short version: It will probably drop by half, from $57 to $30), he picks up 24/7 Wall Street's idea of having Dow Jones buy its U.K. rival, the Financial Times. Let's hope Murdoch keeps his promises about editorial independence. Or fancies having a stable of cheeky employees around. Because we'd sure miss Savitz if News Corp. buys Dow Jones and something, well, unpleasant happens.

When we were at the newsstand earlier, we couldn't help but notice the cover of this week's Barron's. "Your Worst Nightmare," says the headline. "Rich parents say their biggest fear is having their children turn into the next Paris Hilton. What wealth managers can do to help kids cope gracefully with money and privilege." And it's illustrated, natch, with a picture of her Parisness.