I haven't had them on my TV in over a decade. But i saw what they tried to do to Michael Lewis and Brad Katsuyama after they made the rounds following their 60 Minutes story aired, because that made news itself.
Lewis was on the Daily Show afterward and answered with the truth: the finance media are completely in bed with the finance business. They aren't journalists, they're cronies and suckups.
Of course this was obvious to me decades ago when I cancelled my WSJ sub; they were clearly shilling rather than investigating, and for some reason were 3 days late with almost every story (can you say insider trading?).
The internet made it better, but of course the noise quotient is way up. But noise is at least arbitrary, not consistently stacked against you. The TV people are undeniably not your ally.
if for some reason the entire market starts to run, as in 2008-2009, the gambling stocks do indeed have a high beta in such situations. that's how Sheldon was able to buy back sole control of his company. it's how WYNN got so low you can count a 20-bagger against it if you're still holding from that point (i was buying, btw, so it's a legit double saw).
but insana's running around with his hair (note: satire) on fire for no good reason. China isn't structured like Wall Street and will indemnify deposits while pounding into submission any bank that is playing as fast and loose as Lehman et al were. perhaps most important, unlike the West, there's nowhere for China's productivity to flee to, because the West's fled to China. economic activity in China will remain robust because there's nowhere for it to drain off to.
this will be the case until China's GDP/capita (~$6500) is on par with the "developed" world ($20-160K). there are cheaper places, but none have anything like the infrastructure and skilled labor pool. China is buffered. Restructuring is reasonable, but not a crash.