Media Faulted For Coverage Of The Economy

Study Finds Coverage Of Economic Downturn In U.S. Lags Behind Public Interest

(AP)  Media coverage of the economic downturn in the U.S. has lagged behind both economic activity and public interest, according to a study being released Monday by a Washington, D.C.-based research group.

The Project for Excellence in Journalism analyzed more than 5,000 economic stories in 2007 and the first half of 2008. The stories, by 48 different news outlets, were delivered by cable news channels, network television, radio, newspapers and the Internet.

The study found that reliance on government data to track the economy is leading to scattershot coverage that, at times, lags months behind actual economic conditions.

"We can see little flashpoints in gas prices or a spike in joblessness but getting the whole picture is extremely difficult, in part because we're depending on government collected data, which could often be three months later," said Project Director Tom Rosenstiel.

At times, this has meant that reporters were writing about weakening economic trends at the very moment that conditions were starting to improve or vice versa.

Meanwhile, various media have focused on different aspects of the economy at different times. Television coverage has tended to focus on gas prices, while newspapers have leaned toward banking and housing stories.

As a result, it is difficult for the casual news consumer to understand the story of the economy, Rosenstiel said. "Is it a housing story? Is it a gasoline prices story? Is it an inflation story?"

The study also found that Americans' concern about the economy has far surpassed the media's focus on the topic. The economy has been the number 2 story of 2008 so far - ahead of the war in Iraq. But media coverage of the presidential race has outstripped economic coverage by a five-to-one margin, although the economy has ranked as Americans' top concern.

There are no easy ways to wean journalists from depending on government statistics, Rosenstiel said.

"We need to create other listening posts than the Treasury Department and the Bureau of Labor Statistics," he said.

"Overall, this is a hard story for journalists to tell because it isn't an event, it isn't a person," Rosenstiel said. "And yet, where they can get a handle on it, it's a story that people are eager to hear."

[omega39-2009]

"We can see little flashpoints in gas prices or a spike in joblessness but getting the whole picture is extremely difficult, in part because we''re depending on government collected data, which could often be three months later," said Project Director Tom Rosenstiel.

A) people don''t need the press to tell them they are being squeezed.

B) the bull-plop being put out by the government is just that, bull-plop.

[terrapin78]

That is what happens when one relys on data from the BU$H ADMINiSTRATIUON. Bu$hies will do anything to keep the reality of everything in the shadows. That way they could say, like Bart Simp0son, "I didn''t do it!"

[wogerwabbit]

At times, this has meant that reporters were writing about weakening economic trends at the very moment that conditions were starting to improve or vice versa.

That''s because they''re stenographers, not reporters. Then we have major windbags like Hannity, O''Reilly and Limbaugh repeating as gospel every bit of subterfuge and sleight of hand that the neconazi party propaganda ministers throw at us. That dam liberal media!

[wardoglrs]

Administration

[beehive21-2009]

The Gov stated we were near a recession ? where they live, the rest of experienced it for three years prior? Nobody believes the Media its ran by the Republicans and there band of thieves.Big Oil running the White House,we would like too hear what the next President intends to do about Big Oil running are country or will it be pay me off,too.Greedy fools.

[itgranny]

"The study found that reliance on government data to track the economy is leading to scattershot coverage that, at times, lags months behind actual economic conditions."

One might also ask why it''s taking the government "months" to figure out the data. By that time we''re in crisis mode and things are hard if not impossible to fix. There were rumblings 5-6 years ago about funky housing loans. If they would have shored up the loopholes back then, we would all have been in better shape. A year or so ago, there was a feeling that speculators had their fingers in the energy till, yet nobody did anything. If they would have slapped those folks back into place right away, our economy would no doubt be looking better. Think of all the money that went to energy rather than vacations, home improvements, new computers and tv''s, etc. And with all that stuff, JOBS.

I see no reason with the computers they have today why they can''t have the raw numbers reported on the 1st and these numbers available the 2nd or 3rd of the month. Businesses do.

[creeper00]

"We can see little flashpoints in gas prices or a spike in joblessness but getting the whole picture is extremely difficult, in part because we''re depending on government collected data, which could often be three months later," said Project Director Tom Rosenstiel.

And we all know that this administration would NEVER stonewall on bad news.

[trillion1]

I don''t need any media to tell me I''m earning less and paying more.

[whitemale08]

The media should be ashamed of itself.

The media not only lags behind behind but purposefully won''t tell you that those "tax cuts for the rich" are not causing all of this hyper-inflation.

The media, out of it''s so-called concerned of being biased, is not telling us that "wars not free" like John McCain seems to think.

We are in the worse crisis since the "Great Depression" and the media needs to take the Republicans to task on this because it happened on their watch.

[labrat9999]

Look, we had the same problem with Iraq. The problem is reporters are not doing their own investigations any longer. They just "report" and are led by the nose by whichever party is in government or AP news agency. Even the nightly news does the same thing. No matter which TV news channel you watch the stories are the same. And the only time, like FOX news, that reporters try to express their opinion they come across as an ill-informed mouthpiece of the GOP!

[lochlan-2009]

labrat9999
That is a 100% accurate. Add to that the endless amounts of censorship, for example the banning of the media showing caskets of the dead soldiers. The Bush Administration has no right to tell the media they can''t show the truth. The Bush Administration knows what happens, though, when people see the dead rather then a number. And they conceded to censor for the Administration!!!! Outrageous!!!!!!

Take CNN, they had a poll yesterday.

Quick Vote
What "Issue #1" topic should be the priority of the new President?
-Health care
-High gas prices
-Mortgage meltdown
-Unemployment

View results


Notice the selection of stopping corruption and fraud, (at best neglegence) the cause of almost all the problems in this country and the cause of all the problems listed in their selection.

Our media quite obviously are owned by corporate elite who try to ballance credibility and censorship with their loud or silent voice on any part of an issue.

[noloyalisti]

In a fascist nation such as the United States (where the corporations are the media, are the war profiteers and own the government) all the mainstream news is propaganda. Of course they coyotes guarding the chicken coop are not going to cover their own disasters they have caused, it''s only common sense.

[talkingham]

The Spanish language networks in the US do a much better job of actually showing news instead of having overpaid celebs and talking heads spew their slop.
I men if you want to see footage of the Russian invasion in Georgia or any other world event you best learn Spanish! They show much better footage on a fraction of the budget of the big 4 US networks!

US news media. What a joke. There is no independent US English speaking press in this era. It''s all about corporate earnings, media wanting to rub elbows with the stars, and little more than news-hoes-hacks that serve their government and political masters.

Fox is the worst, the others aren''t much better.

[talkingham]

And oh yeah, while Fox is the worst offender in my opinion of slanting the news politically (it''s so obvious that I take it for granted, their "news" is presented in a more interesting manner from a programming point of view than ABC, CBS and NBC. What none of them seem to get is that Americans would prefer real unbiased news reporting, investigative journalism and actual footage of stuff instead of talking heads. The first network to re-discover the art of reporting news will be a big winner.

[tommancuso]

US news media. What a joke. There is no independent US English speaking press in this era. It''''s all about corporate earnings,

=====================================================
Not untrue, however, you can get some pretty good coverage and excellent balance from PBS with Jim Lehrer.

[lovesamerica]

the trouble is we have too much coverage of things that only hurt our many efforts. People get up in arms over things that in years past were left to the ''proffesionals. War should never be fought in the press,issues that are important to the public shouldn''t be a daily news story as it takes time to know about real changes good or bad.Stars cannot poop without it being reported,usually with a divorce pending. I don''t care about Jolie/pitt giving a fraction of their millions to their own tax exempt cause. People are so *** unhappy these days and it is due to too much useless info. There are so many things we cannot do anything about which leads to frustration and anger. I kind of like my rather simple world, yet the world is creeping in, in a very disturbing way.

[element51]

I have found that C-SPAN and PBS are the best at reporting actual news. The major networks are nothing but a joke. Their coverage is shallow and they never do any in depth reporting. It always cracks me up when I hear people rant about the left wing media. Since all the media is controlled by a few rich fat cats they are not going to allow the truth to be reported. And now with the internet anything can be put out there and people will buy into it. So many lies and so little truth. It''s almost impossible to get enough factual information to make a decision about anything.

[rushlimpdrug]

"Media Faulted For Coverage Of The Economy"


Does this headline make sense?

[ubrew12]

a recent study examined every article on climate change published in peer-reviewed scientific journals over a 10-year period. Of the 928 articles on climate change, not one of them disagreed with the consensus position that climate change is happening or is human-induced.

These findings contrast dramatically with the ''liberal'' media''s reporting on climate change. One recent study analyzed coverage of climate change in four influential American newspapers (New York Times, Washington Post, LA Times, and Wall Street Journal) over a 14-year period. It found that more than HALF of the articles discussing climate change gave EQUAL WEIGHT to the scientifically discredited views of the skeptics.

Ya gotta just LUV that ''liberal'' media. Bush says, ''lets invade Iraq'', and they immediately hire as many Generals as they can find to make the case for war, calling them ''independent experts''... yah. And now our economy is going to pot and our media dont want to talk about it: how very ''liberal'' is that? The fiction of a ''liberal'' media is one of the great success stories the right has played on the American people in the last 20 years.

[clestes-2009]

Anyone who depends on the mainstream US media for their news are completely ignorant of the true news. Everything they say is completely BS. They sold out to the shrub govn years ago.

[babooph]

My favorite is the business channel lauding Forbes-the parasite inherits a fortune from his father-made when Ikes tax rate was triple what todays is-they have him whining about a flat tax of 10% he wants to pay, so he can hold onto it!!

[babooph]

The propaganda system has been VERY quiet about all those CEO guys wanting Bush!!No wonder there is no confidence in the fools!!All that $ in pay,mainly due to them choosing the lobbyists to bribe the politicos!!

[eddom949]

People like that little area under the graph, might I suggest Calculus for those so inclined.

[andor3]

"The propaganda system has been VERY quiet about all those CEO guys wanting Bush!!No wonder there is no confidence in the fools!"

An interesting point. Wonder if the fall of Bush and the neocons and the coming house cleaning in government will spill over into business? It would be nice to see shareholders start exerting control and punishing the incompetents in business as well as government. People who do nothing but shuffle paper are being paid millions while people who do real work struggle to eat... no wonder the economy is in trouble.

[apprxam]

Well, what the hell else should we expect from the media. I really have to search deep inside to try and remember when was the last time any corpo-media outlet had the public''s interest at heart.

Since 2006, I''ve heard nothing from the media except complaints about the internet, its draw to an ever expanding reader/viewership from them and its "high-noise" factor that they claim still validate them as the true gatekeeper with our interest in mind.

But every chance they''ve had to convince us otherwise, they''ve failed to take it.

[oneworldusa]

The media may have helped create the recession. Once the R word is used, people start tightening up, we did. I lost 2 state jobs in the last 6 months due to budget cuts. So, I know what its like to be without an income at all. We get by on $50/week at the grocery store. I found a way to take the extra cost of gas and take it off our grocery and power bill, by sacrificing a little on each to keep our savings rate the same as before.

[xlib]

The msm can be faulted for a lot of poor coverage. Face it, they cover what they want to cover and vice versa.

[frankbowers]

I am just curious has any thought of why this exist. First two or three men who are lackies for gw bush own 90 to 95% of all news and they only put put things that make the little squint eyed ba$ **** look good and the economy going to hel l in a hand basket would not be good for him. It is a disgrace to write and act as if they do not know why this is happening. SHAME ON THEM.

Frank Bowers of Austin, TX