Pro-Obama media always shocked by bad economic news Read more at the Washington Exa

[Denny Crane]

http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/2011/05/pro-obama-media-always-shocked-bad-economic-news

By: Michael Barone 05/28/11 8:05 PM

Unexpectedly!

As megablogger Glenn Reynolds, aka Instapundit, has noted with amusement, the word "unexpectedly" or variants thereon keep cropping up in mainstream media stories about the economy.

"New U.S. claims for unemployment benefits unexpectedly climbed," reported CNBC.com May 25.

"Personal consumption fell," Business Insider reported the same day, "when it was expected to rise."

"Durable goods declined 3.6 percent last month," Reuters reported May 25, "worse than economists' expectations."

"Previously owned home sales unexpectedly fall," headlined Bloomberg News May 19.

"U.S. home construction fell unexpectedly in April," wrote the Wall Street Journal May 18.

Those examples are all from the last two weeks. Reynolds has been linking to similar items since October 2009.

Mainstream media may finally be catching up. "The latest economic numbers have not been good," David Leonhardt wrote in the May 26 New York Times. "Another report showed that economic growth at the start of the year was no faster than the Commerce Department initially reported -- 'a real surprise,' said Ian Shepherdson of High Frequency Economics."

Which raises some questions. As Instapundit reader Gordon Stewart, quoted by Reynolds on May 17, put it, "How many times in a row can something happen unexpectedly before the experts start to, you know, expect it? At some point, shouldn't they be required to state the foundation for their expectations?"

 

[Denny Crane]

Re: Pro-Obama media always shocked by bad economic news Read more at the Washington

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

Re: Pro-Obama media always shocked by bad economic news Read more at the Washington

analysts wouldn't know preferred stock from live stock.

 

[barfo]

Re: Pro-Obama media always shocked by bad economic news Read more at the Washington

Another fairly dishonest opinion piece. Congratulations on finding it, there are so few of these available to choose from.

The question here is, unexpectedly compared to what? The answer is, unexpectedly compared to what 'the experts' had predicted. Who are the experts that the media relies upon? Depending on which economic indicator it is, it might be a government prediction or a consensus of government and private sector predictions. And mostly, those experts in government aren't in the west wing. It's not likely that Obama spends a lot of time predicting hog belly futures.

So, is the media in the tank for Obama when they report that the experts predictions were wrong? It's hard to see how that logically follows.

This might mean that we have lousy economists in this country (ob. joke: is there any other kind?). It doesn't say anything about the media that they reported on the fact that the economists were wrong.

But given the number of these predictions, it would probably be easy to collect a sample of bad predictions like this, even if the economists erred half the time on the high side and half the time on the low side. And given the basic con-artist nature of this article - pretending it is the media's predictions of the economy that were wrong - it would not surprise me to find that the quotes are rather uh, selective as well.

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

Re: Pro-Obama media always shocked by bad economic news Read more at the Washington

It's clear "liberals" don't understand economics.

 

[Denny Crane]

Re: Pro-Obama media always shocked by bad economic news Read more at the Washington

Barone's an interesting character. Quoting Wikipedia:

Michael Barone (born 1944 in Highland Park, Michigan) is an American political analyst, pundit and journalist. He is best known for being the principal author of The Almanac of American Politics, a reference work concerning US governors and federal politicians, and published biennially by National Journal. The Almanac has been called "definitive and essential for anyone writing seriously about campaigns and Congress."[1]

He wrote for US News and World Report before moving to the Examiner.

He graduated from Harvard, like the President, and got his law degree from Yale. He worked in government for Democrats.

 

[barfo]

Re: Pro-Obama media always shocked by bad economic news Read more at the Washington

He graduated from Harvard, like the President, and got his law degree from Yale.

I think it was the previous president who graduated from Harvard. This one is Columbia, then Harvard Law.

barfo

 

[maxiep]

Re: Pro-Obama media always shocked by bad economic news Read more at the Washington

It's not the entire body of economists that are always bowled over by a feather by this unexpectedly negative news. It's the economists that the media relies upon. Those economists are a cottage industry in an of themselves. The reason they use these economists is because of their belief that these neo-Keynsian policies will promote economic growth. When they don't work, it's "unexpected". It will always be "unexpected" when these policies fail, just as it will be "unexpected" when classical economic policies create growth.

The solution? Find different economists. They're out there, they're just not in places journalists like to look.

 

[chris_in_pdx]

Re: Pro-Obama media always shocked by bad economic news Read more at the Washington

It's clear "liberals" don't understand economics.

That's right, Denny, always the voice of reason. It's clear "conservatives" don't have a fucking brain cell to share between them. See, I can speak in generalities, too!

 

[maxiep]

Re: Pro-Obama media always shocked by bad economic news Read more at the Washington

Generally, left leaning (saltwater) economists are more concerned about how the pie is distributed. Freshwater economists are generally more concerned with the size of the pie. Those different priorities lead them to subscribe different remedies to the same problem.

 

[Natebishop3]

Re: Pro-Obama media always shocked by bad economic news Read more at the Washington

I think it was the previous president who graduated from Harvard. This one is Columbia, then Harvard Law.

barfo

No, Bush was Yale.

 

[barfo]

Re: Pro-Obama media always shocked by bad economic news Read more at the Washington

No, Bush was Yale.

Yeah, you are right. Well, SOMEBODY must have gone to Harvard, who the hell was it?

barfo

 

[Natebishop3]

Re: Pro-Obama media always shocked by bad economic news Read more at the Washington

Yeah, you are right. Well, SOMEBODY must have gone to Harvard, who the hell was it?

barfo

I guess W did go to Harvard for his masters.

Some of the others are Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, JFK, and the Adams'.

 

[barfo]

Re: Pro-Obama media always shocked by bad economic news Read more at the Washington

I guess W did go to Harvard for his masters.

Some of the others are Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, JFK, and the Adams'.

Yes, the Addams Family, that was who I was thinking of. Uncle Fester was one of our greatest presidents.

barfo

 

[Natebishop3]

Re: Pro-Obama media always shocked by bad economic news Read more at the Washington

Yes, the Addams Family, that was who I was thinking of. Uncle Fester was one of our greatest presidents.

barfo

Which one? The original or the movie?

 

[barfo]

Re: Pro-Obama media always shocked by bad economic news Read more at the Washington

Which one? The original or the movie?

The original, of course.

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

Re: Pro-Obama media always shocked by bad economic news Read more at the Washington

That's right, Denny, always the voice of reason. It's clear "conservatives" don't have a fucking brain cell to share between them. See, I can speak in generalities, too!

You missed the thread and article about how lefties failed economics tests.

 

[Denny Crane]

Re: Pro-Obama media always shocked by bad economic news Read more at the Washington

http://www.cnbc.com/id/43239586

Horror for US Economy as Data Falls off Cliff

The last month has been a horror show for the U.S. economy, with economic data falling off a cliff, according to Mike Riddell, a fund manager at M&G Investments in London.

It seems that almost every bit of data about the health of the US economy has disappointed expectations recently," said Riddell, in a note sent to CNBC on Wednesday.

"US house prices have fallen by more than 5 percent year on year, pending home sales have collapsed and existing home sales disappointed, the trend of improving jobless claims has arrested, first quarter GDP wasn’t revised upwards by the 0.4 percent forecast, durables goods orders shrank, manufacturing surveys from Philadelphia Fed, Richmond Fed and Chicago Fed were all very disappointing."

"And that’s just in the last week and a bit," said Riddell.

Pointing to the dramatic turnaround in the Citigroup "Economic Surprise Index" for the United States, Riddell said the tumble in a matter of months to negative from positive is almost as bad as the situation before the collapse of Lehman Brothers in 2008.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

Re: Pro-Obama media always shocked by bad economic news Read more at the Washington

Another fairly dishonest opinion piece. Congratulations on finding it, there are so few of these available to choose from.

The question here is, unexpectedly compared to what? The answer is, unexpectedly compared to what 'the experts' had predicted. Who are the experts that the media relies upon? Depending on which economic indicator it is, it might be a government prediction or a consensus of government and private sector predictions. And mostly, those experts in government aren't in the west wing. It's not likely that Obama spends a lot of time predicting hog belly futures.

So, is the media in the tank for Obama when they report that the experts predictions were wrong? It's hard to see how that logically follows.

This might mean that we have lousy economists in this country (ob. joke: is there any other kind?). It doesn't say anything about the media that they reported on the fact that the economists were wrong.

But given the number of these predictions, it would probably be easy to collect a sample of bad predictions like this, even if the economists erred half the time on the high side and half the time on the low side. And given the basic con-artist nature of this article - pretending it is the media's predictions of the economy that were wrong - it would not surprise me to find that the quotes are rather uh, selective as well.

barfo

This is a post where you are manly attempting to defend the undefendable. But, it's what people on the extreme edge of their party affiliation do.

Sorry, barfo, but it's a fail.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

Re: Pro-Obama media always shocked by bad economic news Read more at the Washington

I think Maxie pretty much hit it when he stated that the [liberal] media needs to find new "economists" to garner information from.

But that's no surprise. The media is predominantly liberal so they use liberal sources. Some media outlets are conservative and use conservative sources. When things don't go the way of their party affiliation, the news is never "as expected".

But at the end, does it really matter? I mean, it's like the weather. "It unexpectedly rained yesterday". So? The economy is the same way. Some months or years it's better than expected and others worse than expected. I do agree the media uses the wrong experts, but I'm not all so sure it matters a whole lot.

 

[barfo]

Re: Pro-Obama media always shocked by bad economic news Read more at the Washington

This is a post where you are manly attempting to defend the undefendable. But, it's what people on the extreme edge of their party affiliation do.

Sorry, barfo, but it's a fail.

Well, at least I was manly about it.

barfo

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

Re: Pro-Obama media always shocked by bad economic news Read more at the Washington

Well, at least I was manly about it.

barfo

Yes. Two points awarded.

 

[maxiep]

Re: Pro-Obama media always shocked by bad economic news Read more at the Washington

We've been shorting the market and it hasn't been anything but good for us. That development is bad news for the market, but it's the only way to get decent risk-adjusted yields.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

Re: Pro-Obama media always shocked by bad economic news Read more at the Washington

I don't see how the word "unexpectedly" is deemed to somehow make it a pro-media spin on Obama.

The fact that it was unexpected to me puts Obama in a worse light. It shows an uncertainty to where he believes this economy is heading.

Maybe it really is unexpected and the question should be not why the media is saying it's unexpected but rather why does Obama not expect these thigs to happen and what does that tell us about his future predictions about the economy.

If I was the pres who just made the call of the decade by going in Pakistan and taking down Bin Laden, I would say whatever the economic numbers that they are just a predictable hiccup in the road to recovery.

 

[maxiep]

Re: Pro-Obama media always shocked by bad economic news Read more at the Washington

I don't see how the word "unexpectedly" is deemed to somehow make it a pro-media spin on Obama.

Think harder. You'll figure it out.