Gibson Presses Economist to Agree Recession Ahead

Photo of Brent Baker.

ABC anchor Charles Gibson twice pushed reluctant guest expert Sam Stovall, chief investment strategist at Standard & Poor's, to agree that high oil prices and the housing “crisis” will soon lead to a recession. On Tuesday's World News, Gibson outlined: “So, the housing crisis, the Treasury Secretary says it's a significant risk to the economy, the Fed Chairman says it's a significant drag on the economy, we have oil prices over $80 a barrel. Sam, isn't that a classic formula for a recession?” Stovall replied that “what I think is encouraging investors is the pro-activeness of the Fed and government officials by making sure that they get ahead of the curve and fend off the recession.” But Gibson was undeterred from his pessimistic assumptions and pressed again about whether the economy is “really broad-based enough to endure this kind of oil price hike and this kind of housing crisis and not have a recession?” Stovall maintained that oil and housing have impacted the economy, yet “our feeling is we'll probably...get away unscathed.”

The October 16 World News on ABC led with a story from Dan Harris on the “housing crisis.” Then Gibson had this discussion with Stovall:

CHARLES GIBSON: So, the housing crisis, the Treasury Secretary says it's a significant risk to the economy, the Fed Chairman says it's a significant drag on the economy, we have oil prices over $80 a barrel. Sam, isn't that a classic formula for a recession?

SAM STOVALL: Well I think certainly Charlie that those are elements that people have to worry about. Going back to 1970, every recession has been accompanied by a year over year decline in residential construction. Plus, when we take a look at the forecast for housing prices, S&P forecasts a decline from peak to trough of eleven percent and we're only half way there. But what I think is encouraging investors is the pro-activeness of the Fed and government officials by making sure that they get ahead of the curve and fend off the recession.

GIBSON: So you say housing prices have another five percent, perhaps, to go down, the oil prices are high. Now in Dan's [Harris] piece, someone said there, well we're a very broad-based economy. Are we really broad-based enough to endure this kind of oil price hike and this kind of housing crisis and not have a recession?

STOVALL: Well, certainly we forecast that we're expecting to see about a two percent increase in the growth of the U.S. economy this year, about one percentage point of that was declined because of the housing woes and also with oil prices. We anticipate that about for every ten dollar increase in the price of oil it takes away one-quarter of one percent of economic growth. It does not leave us a lot of wiggle room, but since the economy is fairly broad, and consumers end up using less oil than they did twenty years ago, that our feeling is we'll probably will get away unscathed.

GIBSON: A remarkably resilient economy then we have.

Resilient enough to resist a downbeat media.

—Brent Baker is Vice President for Research and Publications at the Media Research Center


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Mayor Bloomberg said much

Mayor Bloomberg said much the same thing.A disgrace.

Well, if a dim gets in

Well, if a dim gets in office, you'll see one of the most miraculous economic recoveries in history. At least that will be the media's story line!

STOVALL: [ ]....our

STOVALL: [ ]....our feeling is we'll probably will get away unscathed.

GIBSON: A remarkably resilient economy then we have.

Ho disappointed did Gibson look when he said that?

Ever since the demoncrats

Ever since the demoncrats took control of congress oil prices have gone even higher.

Missing the Point

Gibson is only pointing out the obvious flaws of a free market and capitalism. These systems cannot sustain and are doomed for failure (because of GREED).

We are very fortunate that we have courageous journalists like Gibson to look out for us. With his guidance, we can move towards a much more intelligent government that will monitor and control the economy.

Courageous Journalists? 

Courageous Journalists?  Give me a break!  Gibson has as much courage as it takes to read a teleprompter. 

I know your comment is

I know your comment is sarcasm, but there really are people who think this way.  Unfortunately, most of those people don't remember the awful consequences of economies controlled by central governments.  Anyone arguing against capitalism only needs to look at the old USSR or the current socialistic economies in Europe to see capitalism will always be the best economic system.

I'm convinced the courageous journalist comment is what Gibson and his ilk really believe they are.  What a joke.

Killgrave - on Gibson

When it comes to Charlie Gibson, and his friends in this "we hate everything about Republican administrations," it's not about his view of economics - rather, it's about his bias in politics.

Back, earlier this year when the DOW crossed 13,000, here was his view: ""But, Betsy, we've had four years of a straight bull market. Doesn't just the timing of this suggest that there might be a correction?"

But back in Aug of 2000, when the DOW was off it's high by 1,100 points, the Nasdaq was down 58% from it's highs, unemployment claims were soaring, CA was in the midst of the Enron blamed energy crisis, the manufacturing index had been in a steep plummet and was nearing the low point in the cycle (continued down until April 2001); here's Gibson pushing the campaign of Al Gore because the economy is so strong:

"The Dow has tripled, we've gone from deficit to surplus,' and that this will give Al Gore a chance to talk about the economy, a new chance to talk about the economy." Aug 3rd, 2000.

What? The economy was dying in the moment.

Many economists, even the MSM's favorite leftist economists, like Dean Baker, were - and had been - screaming about the dangers facing Americans (especially the working class), when that bubble collapsed. The reason that the federal (and states) budget deficit would quickly swing from surpluses to huge deficits was because of the historic bubble crash; the reason millions of Americans would loose their jobs was because of what was happening in that moment.

Gibson and the MSM choose to ignore the news of what was happening, and instead, kept pushing his view of the great news simply for the purpose of keeping the Democrats in the White House. Simply put - he lied to the American people (or he is totally ignorant of the facts - take your pick.) This site and the MRC has documented hundreds of examples of how our media plays this game. They hide, or play down, the bad news during Democrat administrations; but during Republican administrations, they hype up bits of bad news during good times, and usually do not report the good news (or at least they find something bad to overshadow the good news).

Yes, Gibson, a recession is

Yes, Gibson, a recession is coming. One day, maybe next year, maybe 10
years from now, we will officially be in a recession. So just keep
predicting that one is on the way. Then, 10 years from now, when your
prediction FINALLY comes true, you can remind us how you knew it all
along. And if you're really on top of things, you can blame it on CO2, since everyone knows recessions have never occured in the past.

Exactly.. Gibson and his msm

Exactly.. Gibson and his msm ilk are really good at showing that gloomy face on their nightly so-called news casts, just dying to see a recession come along NOW so it can be blamed on Bush and if/when their sweetheart Hillary gets in office, all will be rosy, literally overnight! 

The collective media has

The collective media has been rooting for a recession for most of the past five years.  Doom is always right around the corner to these fools.  It's funny, I do not recall such an eagerness in the late 90's into the year 2000, when there really was a crash on the horizon.  Even the Fed Chairman's warning of "irrational exhuberance" did not move most of the press back then.  Now, what exactly was the difference between then and now?  Why was the media so reluctant to predict coming bad times back then but they are so anxious to do so now?  Hmmmm.

There IS a recession ahead

It will happen right after Frau Clintler repeals the tax cuts and installs Socialized medicine, but of course Bush will get the blame...

Hey Charlie, just because

Hey Charlie, just because you hope something will happen doesn't mean it will happen.  So keep wishing for recession...we know you are.

Did you...

...forget a <sarc> flag? You can't be serious.

 

Why is it that lefties believe that 'the people' noted in the 2nd are different than the 'the people' mentioned elsewhere in the Bill of Rights?

Gibson & Economics Dont Mix

Isn't this the same Charles Gibson  who complained that young people don't watch his show because there aren't enough television ads aimed at young people when it is on?  If Gibson can't understand the economics of his own industry how can he be trusted with any other economic matter?