Friday, July 18, 2003

Receding Recession? The New York Times quotes the National Bureau of Economic Research to say that the recession that started in March 2001 ended in November of that same year, but that jobs never recovered because of the effect of increased productivity. However, let's examine the concept of recession. It was only in November of 2001 that the same group even suggested that there was a recession, according to this column from a Purdue professor. Why did it then take the NBER until now - midway through 2003 - to report that the recession ended about the time that the group seemed to identify it? And does anyone remember all the stories pointed to the disagree among economists of whether we technically were in a recession? This story from the Industry Standard - and I'm surprised that anything from that publication is still available on the web (It go out of business, right? Who's paying the bills?) - made that point in May of 2001. So, was there no disagreement? Some? When did things change? Is there some reason that the doom and gloom set up by the story - everyone is doing fine except for the people - is not challenged by the questions economists had at the time? Or is this a case of reporters and editors being memory challenged? 8:12:12 PM    comment []

Opposites Attract? I'm not sure there is anything to add to an article called Neo-Nazis, Extremist Jews Unite. 12:27:50 PM    comment []

Count Down It's been a busy week here in real world media land, with pile ups, screw ups, and coffee cups. Now that I have a moment to breathe and read, I notice that the press has largely been reporting an increasing death figure from the Iraq smaller than the official number. First, congratulations to Editor & Publisher, a trade magazine for the newspaper industry, for recognizing the problem, and a disappointed shake of the head to the reporters who lack enough enterprise to do some digging. I still remember the nightly body bag counts from national television during the Viet Nam war. No, the numbers in Iraq cannot compare by orders of magnitude, but people should know what this recent and continuing action has cost, in lives and in money, so they can decide whether continuing is in their best interest. Death, whether from a bullet or an auto accident, is as final, as uncompromising, and as grievous. It does leave one with the question of why many media outlets would look only at combat deaths. Could it be that to please readers, thereby selling publications, writers and editors unconsciously mimic the tastes and preferences of the general public? If so, might a "liberal bias" in the past to some degree represent a national mood, and when the collective opinion seemed different, could the sense of media kinship be shifting? 11:47:22 AM    comment []

© Copyright 2003 Erik Sherman.