|
PDF Version
One Economy, Two Spins
Economic Conditions Portrayed as Positive
During Clinton Presented as Negative for Bush
Executive
Summary
    The media gave President
Bush consistently negative press about perceived poor job creation
and unemployment in the summer of 2004 but their reports were
overwhelmingly positive when President Clinton ran for reelection in
the summer of 1996 under similar economic circumstances. The media
have consistently criticized the Bush record, minimizing 13 straight
months of positive job creation, more than 1.5 million new jobs in
2004 and an unemployment rate that dropped from 6.3 percent to 5.4
percent. In contrast, the media consistently hailed the Clinton
record of seven straight months of positive job creation, more than
2 million jobs in 1996 and an unemployment rate that dropped from
5.8 percent to 5.2 percent.
    The analysis was completed by the Media Research
Center’s Free Market Project. It focused on TV news coverage the day
of or newspaper coverage the day after the release of unemployment
and job creation reports during the summer reelection season in 1996
and 2004. (The 10 EMPLOYMENT SITUATION reports, five from May
through September each year, came out the month following their
survey date.) FMP researchers analyzed ABC, NBC and CBS, CNN, The
Washington Post and The New York Times. Their findings
include:
-
Clinton Good; Bush Bad: Stories about jobs
during Bill Clinton’s reelection campaign were positive 85 percent
of the time – more than six times as often as they were for Bush,
despite similar economic data. Reporters praised the Clinton
unemployment rate of 5.6 percent as “low,” but they downplayed a 5.4
percent rate under Bush and called job growth “anemic.”
-
Good News Becomes Bad News: Under Bush,
reporters presented good economic data as bad news stories by
minimizing positive achievements and emphasizing people who might be
out of work or regions of the U.S. that were still “struggling.” The
opposite approach was taken under President Clinton. Then, reporters
explained away a 0.2 percent rise in unemployment as minor or, “not
necessarily bad news.”
-
CNN the Best; CBS the Worst: No network has
been consistent in its coverage of Clinton and Bush. CNN did the
best job covering jobs and unemployment. The network was balanced in
its coverage of the Clinton economy and did characterize one month
under Bush as positive. CBS was the most unbalanced in its coverage.
After the five Employment Situation reports in the summer of 2004,
the network didn’t find any good news to report. CBS didn’t air any
negative job creation and unemployment stories during the Clinton
months. CBS Evening News anchor Dan Rather merits criticism.
He handled an unemployment increase during Clinton by downplaying
it. Then the reporter covering the story claimed it wasn’t even bad
news.
    The Free Market Project offers
a series of recommendations for the media in an effort to help
journalists provide more balanced reporting on unemployment and job
issues. Those recommendations include:
-
Urging the media to report stories that actually
reflect the data and to find a consistent way to cover the monthly
release of labor data so that it isn’t spun any direction.
-
Encouraging the media to help the public understand
unemployment rates and job creation.
-
Suggesting the media find a way to make balanced
news coverage an ongoing priority.
    Along with these
recommendations, this study includes a commentary by Dr. Gary
Wolfram, a George Munson Professor of Political Economy at Hillsdale
College. Wolfram explains that the media should look at the existing
employment picture from a more informed view and understand “when
one compares the current unemployment rate of 5.4% to historical
levels, it is quite low.” (See page 18).
See Full
Study
also see FMP commentary
"Reporting Labor
Statistics Correctly"
The Free Market Project is a division of the
Media Research Center
Dan Gainor, Director
www.freemarketproject.org
The Media Research Center
325 South Patrick Street • Alexandria, Virginia, 22314
(703) 683-9733 •
www.mediaresearch.org
|