Kevin Murphy Does the Job Patterico Won’t Do
Over at The Jury Talks Back, Kevin Murphy does the job I’m supposed to be doing: skewering the L.A. Times. As Kevin notes, the paper tells us that the economic crisis is caused by fear . . . and then posts a deceptive headline designed to scare people: “Job losses at highest level since 1945.” Problem is, “it isn’t until well past the jump that we are told that this is in absolute numbers in a country with double the population that it had in 1945.”
The only thing we have to fear is the L.A. Times‘s distortions themselves.
The only weakness in Kevin’s analysis is his seeming failure to comprehend the editors’ motive in distorting the figures. Kevin tells editors: “Obama won. You can stop now.” But Kevin, there is method to the editors’ madness. We have only one president at a time, remember — and that president is still George W. Bush. It’s important to dramatize the extent of the economic failures that occurred during his presidency, so that Obama’s task looks as daunting as possible. (It’s daunting enough even with accurate facts, to be sure . . . but Big Media editors figure every nudge helps.) Plus, there’s the ever-present need in Big Media to add drama to any story, and to downplay any facts that detract from the most sensational possible interpretation.
Go read Kevin’s entire post. It’s a “Power of the Jump” entry as well! And make sure to start reading The Jury Talks Back every day.
P.S. In the first comment at Kevin’s post, Steven Den Beste weighs in with this comment: “Job losses at the LA Times are certainly at a record level. If they’re going to be miserable, why shouldn’t the rest of us?”
Speaking of which, the (completely unconfirmed) rumor going around the L.A. Times newsroom is that there are another 100 layoffs on the horizon.
There is also another factor. The more the dems play on the politics of fear on the economy the more green light they feel they will have to socialize the entire economy. Crisis is opportunity according to MIA Rahmbo. The press wants to give Obama cover for the most sweeping government intervention since the New Deal.
eaglewingz08 (c46606) — 1/11/2009 @ 7:54 amWell, of course there will be further layoffs at the Los Angeles Times. All of those newsroom employees whose job it was to help get Barack Hussein Obama have now served their purpose, and won’t be needed again until 2012.
Can you get 156 weeks of unemployment in California?
The very cynical Dana (556f76) — 1/11/2009 @ 8:42 amWell, duhhh! I left out the word “elected” following Mr Obama’s name.
[slapping forehead!]
The typo-laden Dana (556f76) — 1/11/2009 @ 8:44 amKevin Drum calls the comparison “moron math”.
Bradley J. Fikes (0ea407) — 1/11/2009 @ 9:30 amCompletely OT, I miss Steven den Beste dreadfully.
Peg C. (48175e) — 1/11/2009 @ 9:42 amNothing new here, it’s what the LA Times does. They just can’t help themselves. “Stop us before we obfuscate again!”, is not written in lipstick on the mirror in the editorial wash room at the Los Angeles Times.
C. Norris (7bc158) — 1/11/2009 @ 10:04 amPatterico–
I am beginning to think that maybe this economic thing is, pardon the expression, a Phantom Menace.
Once Obama is safely in the White House, everything about this menace will evaporate with the possible exception of trillion-dollar deficits.
Something like a fireman who sets a fire, calls the newspapers and then the firehouse, and stands outside with the camera crew saying “Damn what a big fire!” before becoming the hero who puts it out.
Kevin Murphy (0b2493) — 1/11/2009 @ 10:50 amMr Murphy made the comparison:
Something like a fireman who sets a fire, calls the newspapers and then the firehouse, and stands outside with the camera crew saying “Damn what a big fire!” before becoming the hero who puts it out.
Except that when the police have a string of unsolved arsons, they start looking at the firemen as primary suspects, because it’s too often true.
A friend of mine — and yes, I actually do have friends! — is a volunteer fireman in a large suburb of Philadelphia, and he told me about a friend the police suspected. The firemen figured out that the police were looking at a particular guy, and he checked his car, finding that the police had hidden a GPS device underneath it. Somehow, that GPS device wound up underneath a SEPTA bus.
As it turned out, the police were right to suspect him, and busted him a month later.
The Dana who actually has friends (556f76) — 1/11/2009 @ 1:47 pmIt’s not only the LASlimes, the Communist News Network (CNN) stated that the 7.2% unemployment rate was the highest since 1945. Seems they can’t remember the Dimmy Carter 8% + along with 20% interest rates and the Slick Willie years. I guess they assume everyone is too stupid (as they are) to remember, or fact check the retards playing news reporter. Not even the most rabid left winger believes or trust the LSM, they use them but don’t believe or trust them.
Scrapiron (dda662) — 1/11/2009 @ 1:57 pmI agree, Kevin. Some say the recession should bottom out in July 2009 or earlier.
DRJ (345e40) — 1/11/2009 @ 4:37 pm____________________________________
The only weakness in Kevin’s analysis is his seeming failure to comprehend the editors’ motive in distorting the figures.
To be fair to them, they’re employed in an industry (the print media) that is tottering all around them, with the LA Times in particular one of the major dominoes that appears to be wobbling the most. IOW, it’s hard not to have a gloom-and-doom mentality when your own job is on the line.
I would imagine the workplace morale at the LA Times is — and has been — quite lousy.
Mark (411533) — 1/11/2009 @ 5:06 pm____________________________________
What everyone forgets is that until the war started women were basically barred from the work force. If counted in 1936 the unemployment rate might have been around 45%. When the war ended and defense plants closed, many women opted for college and our entire society changed. I don’t know how the dead guys from WWII who were formerly unemployed figures into all this either. History lies. And the present isn’t so dam truthful either.
howard432 (cc8b85) — 1/11/2009 @ 5:20 pm“…many women opted for college…”
The fact that colleges were overflowing with ex-GI’s didn’t have a thing to do with it…
AD (f2ee3d) — 1/11/2009 @ 5:23 pmI think the newspapers will keep spinning for Obama in hopes they can get some bail out money.
That LA Times scare headline had a sub-head underneath that said the unemployment figures don’t include everyone out of work. You had to get to the end of the story to learn that some people work part-time or are unemployable, i.e. criminals. But this is nothing new in the keeping of unemployment figures.
Alta Bob (f69930) — 1/12/2009 @ 7:11 amYup! The headlines of this country’s newspapers, and the leads of the networks evening news, will proudly herald that: “We’ll all be drinkin’ that free bubble-ubb and eatin’ some rainbow stew”.(Merle Haggard 1980).
C. Norris (f1bbb4) — 1/12/2009 @ 1:08 pm[…] told you back on the 11th that the unconfirmed rumor was that another 100 layoffs were on the […]
Patterico’s Pontifications » More L.A. Times Layoffs Rumored (e4ab32) — 7/22/2009 @ 12:01 am