Good economic coverage is buried
Meg Kreikemeier, writing on TCS Daily, makes a good case that the recent strong economic news has been downplayed by various media, including The New York Times, Chicago Tribune and the national magazines.
Kreikemeier wrties, “A perusal the New York Times and the Chicago Tribune in late November and through mid-December revealed that almost all of these positive economic trends were found not in the headlines but on pages two or later in the business section.
“The New York Times published one front page article, ‘Upbeat Signs Hold Cautions For the Future,’ where the writer hedged the recent results. After noting that gasoline prices had dropped, consumer confidence had increased, new home sales had hit a record, the stock market had finally risen, after remaining relatively flat for years, and factories were expecting a ‘happy holiday season,’ the New York Times wrote:
“‘By most measures, the economy appears to be doing fine. No, scratch that, it appears to be booming. But as always with the United States economy, it is not quite that simple. For every encouraging sign, there is an explanation.’
“Well, yes, there’s always an explanation. And here’s an obvious one: no economy is perfect.”
She later skewered the magazines, noting that a search of articles referring to the economy in 1993 and 1994 under President Clinton found more written then than about President Bush and the economy in 2004 and 2005. “A review of the magazines revealed that far more articles were written about President Clinton in the weekly news magazines whereas the bulk of the articles written about President Bush were found in financial and trade magazines and in right-of-center publications like The National Review and The Weekly Standard,” said Kreikemeier.
Read her entire analysis here.