Sure, let's imagine you're walking in a big library. This library is like the whole system we have here.

1. **Google**: This is the librarian who helps us find books (information). We tell it what we're looking for, and it gets it from all the other systems that have books (websites).

2. **Benzinga**: Think of this as a special shelf in our library. It has lots of newspapers about business, like stocks and markets. The librarian (Google) knows this shelf is good for finding those kinds of books.

3. **Carson Block** & **Muddy Waters**: These are like two book critics. Carson writes reviews for Muddy Waters, which some people trust because they've been right before about books being not so good (stocks going down). But sometimes they're wrong too.

4. **Short Sellers**: Some people borrow books (stocks) thinking the price will go down and they can buy them back cheaper to make a profit. Carson's reviews help these people decide which books (stocks) to borrow.

5. **Top Stories** & **Tech Briefs**: These are like two different lists of interesting or important books that other people might want to read too.

So, in simple terms, this page is telling us what some critics think about some stocks, and showing us a few other interesting things to learn about too! Read from source...

Based on the provided text, here are some aspects that could be criticized or seen as inconsistent, biased, or irrational:

1. **Lack of Context**: The text jumps straight into a list of stocks with their prices and percentage changes, but it lacks context about why these specific stocks were chosen or what significant events might have influenced their performance.

2. **No Analysis or Insights**: The text merely states the facts without any analysis, insights, or expert opinion. It doesn't tell us why we should care about these price movements, which makes the information much less valuable to readers.

3. **Bias Towards Negative News**: While not necessarily irrational or emotional, the focus on "Short Sellers" and a single negative story ("Muddy Waters") could give the impression that the news is biased towards negative events.

4. **Emotional Language in Headline**: The use of words like "short sellers" and "attacks" in the headline could be seen as sensational or emotionally charged language, which might not align with objective financial reporting.

5. **Over-reliance on Brand Names**: There's a lot of emphasis on well-known brands (Benzinga, Carson Block, Muddy Waters), but this doesn't necessarily provide useful information for readers' investment decisions.

6. **Lack of Diverse Perspectives**: The text presents views from short sellers and one notable critic, but it lacks other perspectives or balanced views. For instance, there's no mention of any positive news about the companies in question or opposing viewpoints on their stock performance.

7. **Rationality and Inconsistency**: Without understanding the broader context or the reasoning behind the events mentioned (like why Muddy Waters is criticizing these companies), it's hard to comment on irrational arguments. However, the lack of clear explanation for the price movements could be seen as inconsistent with thorough financial reporting.

8. **Irrelevant Information**: The repeated mentions of specific Benzinga services or channels seem inserted more for self-promotion than to provide value or context to readers' understanding of the news story.

The article appears to have a **negative** sentiment due to the following reasons:

1. **Short Seller Involvement**: Carson Block of Muddy Waters is mentioned, which often signals bearish sentiments as short sellers aim to profit from stock price declines.
2. **Price Movement**: NVIDIA Corp's stock is reported to be down by 0.34%, indicating a decline in its share price.
3. **No Contrasting Bullish Points**: While the article mentions Alphabet Inc (Google), there are no positive points mentioned about NVIDIA or any other stocks.

So, based on the provided information, the sentiment of this article is negative.