Media Pump Up Obama, Despite High Gas Prices
For years while George W. Bush was in the White House, the three broadcast networks and other media repeatedly hyped the threat of rising gas prices, exaggerated the "record" price of gas and incorrectly predicted, $4, $5 and $6 gasoline or even higher. Now the gas price story has been turned upside down under the anti-oil presidency of Obama, despite sustained high gas prices.
Rather than using gas prices to attack Obama, many in the news media have spun prices predicting lower prices and failing to make year over year comparisons. When gas prices peaked this year on May 5, 2011, at $3.985, media outlets didn't wait long to predict a "steady decline." Just two days later on May 7, Associated Press wrote on: "Expect a drop of nearly 50 cents as early as June, analysts say." It took an additional three months to realize a drop of that magnitude (Sept. 27). But in 2008 after gas prices had been sliced in half, a CBS reporter called low prices "bad news."
USA Today also got it wrong, predicting on June 24, 2011, that gas would be at $3.40 or lower by July 4. But on Independence Day, gas prices were 16 cents-a-gallon higher than the paper predicted.
In June, the Obama administration decided to tap the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to lower pump prices. The Heritage Foundation called the decision a "big mistake" and a "short-sighted political ploy." Yet media outlets like CNN Money claimed that "boosting the nation's oil supply [via the SPR] could lower gas prices as much as 50 cents a gallon" although that relief was "still weeks away." CBS found that prices initially dropped about 5 cents, but then started to rise again.
At the time CNN and other media outlets predicted the SPR release would reduce prices by as much as 50 cents, the national average for gasoline was $3.612-a-gallon. Five months later, prices still haven't fallen 50 cents from that day's price.
Networks Hype Falling Prices in 2011, Imagined Much Higher Prices in 2005
For much of 2011, the three broadcasts networks have hyped falling prices and included predictions of dramatic drops in price.
On Aug. 15, 2011, ABC "World News" touted the "stealth stimulus" of a 7-cent drop in gas prices for that week, down to $3.60-a-gallon. Diane Sawyer called it "bright economic news." Sawyer ignored the fact that gas had been 85 cents-a-gallon cheaper exactly one year earlier. A few network reports in August also predicted 50 cent drops in the price of a gallon. So far, they've been wrong.
Back in 2005, those same networks did the opposite inflating the price of gas (which was around $2.62) by showing pictures of pump prices, on average, 75 cents per gallon higher than the national average. In some cases, the prices were up to $3.25 higher than the national average.
In 2008, ABC's "World News" made a rare admission for any news program after gas prices had dropped roughly $1-a-gallon from the July 2008 peak of $4.11. To their credit, they admitted that the network's predictions of $5-a-gallon gasoline had not happened. Prices continued to fall that year, bottoming out $2.50 lower than the July high by Dec. 30.
Yet, the networks continue to spin gas prices the way they want. As of Nov. 16, 2011, the national average price for gas was at $3.40, much higher than the end of Bush's term. A week earlier some news outlets reported that gas prices could be headed much higher, perhaps to $4.50-a-gallon in some places by spring.
If the year were 2005, 2006 or 2007, this would have been big news to the networks which berated Bush with high gas price stories. But instead, the three broadcast networks virtually ignored the prediction of much higher prices airing only one news brief during ABC's "Good Morning America" that mentioned the potential for $4.50-a-gallon gasoline. One additional story warned that $4 gas could happen within months.
The Los Angeles Times reported that the average price of gasoline, $3.424 on Nov. 7, had "shattered the old record for this week", according to the Energy Department. Never had the U.S. seen such high gas prices during the first week of November. That same report quoted Tom Kloza of the Oil Price Information Service. Kloza said, "I think we will see prices in 2012 that will break … records."
Another price expert in that story, Bob van der Valk predicted gas in California would reach $4.50-a-gallon by Easter.
Unfortunately, media spin on economic issues including gas prices is nothing new. Hyping falling prices, when they are much higher than in prior years and during the tenure of a anti-oil president is disingenuous. Obama consistently attacks oil in his messaging and his administration which had in place a de facto moratorium on drilling and just postponed a decision regarding the Keystone XL pipeline. That pipeline would have brought more than just Canadian tar sands oil to the U.S., it would have created jobs for thousands.
In early 2011, Business & Media Institute compared a period of rising gas prices in 2008 under Bush to a similar (slightly longer) time period in 2011. BMI found the networks did more than 2 ½ times as many stories during the Bush time period versus Obama. Bush was also linked to "skyrocketing" gas prices. He was mentioned in 15 times more gas price reports than Obama was in 2011.
- Julia A. Seymour's blog
- Login to post comments
















Comments
Disgusting LSM AGAIN!
Submitted by MaximusBraveheart on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 1:47pm.
They could not stop hyping high gas prices with ongoing scare stories prior to Obama coming in. Hardly a peep now!
-- Maximusbraveheart -- Is TRUTH knowable? Moral Relativism is the abandonment of Truth. Truth is knowable. Truth conforms to Reality. Reality is observable by evidence & witness in this day & from history. Relativism is Sesame Street play land.
could you imagine
Submitted by jimtrees on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 10:20pm.
How cheap the price of gas would be if Obama allowed the pipe-line from Canada? But, since he made that promise to Soros not to drill or do anything to hurt Soros's investments in South America, the cost to the American people will remain high. That is the extra puppet string George is yanking on Obama with.
I've thought about this too
Submitted by TempusFugit on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 1:58pm.
I check oil prices every day, and always wonder why in the summer oil was at $147 a barrel and the price of a gallon of gas was $4.14. Now in the fall of 2011 Oil is about $100/barrel but gas is about $3.20. Shouldn't the price of gas be about $2.60 now? I've heard every reason under the sun from the MSM about why gas and oil prices are so high, except the real one. They say it was the Bush Administration artificially inflating prices (after all, even tho there's no proof, he IS an oil man, so he has to be behind it), greedy oil companies, with record profits, too few refineries, foreign speculators, a weak dollar. In 2008 it wasn't the fault of gas station owners, who make only pennies on each gallon. Fast forward to 2011 and IT IS THE FAULT of gas station owners! After all it's wrong of anyone to make a profit these days. But the true reason is the EPA won't let us drill for new oil sources or build new refineries. Gas stations and oil companies are afraid to lower prices, because they're afraid of not making a profit and their stock falling. Simple as that. But the MSM won't tell you this. That'd be too much like journalism
This should be why
Submitted by jon_torlin on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 2:13pm.
I'll let the financial gurus tell me if I'm wrong or not, but as I understand it, the gas prices (along with everything else) are the way they are due to the value of the dollar which has gone down about 20-30% in the last few years.
Part of that was massive printing of dollars(Thanks, Bernake!) for all that "QE" crap.
-Jon
I'm no financial wizard either...
Submitted by TempusFugit on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 2:18pm.
..and that may be correct, but you can't ignore the EPA's involvement either. Like a certain beautiful, intelligent woman said: drill baby drill
No way
Submitted by jon_torlin on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 2:38pm.
Oh hell no you can't ignore the EPA, they classified CO2 as a POLLUTANT for God's sake! They are a bigger waste of taxpayer dollars than Solyndra. Ticks me off to no end that this bunch of crooks give the environment higher dominion over people.
I *want* us to drill for our own oil, build more/update our refineries and the biggest thing of all, to get off this nonsense of 40+ blends of gasoline(not to mention getting away from ethanol) which is also a driving factor in gas prices. We all breathe the same air, how the hell is one blend in Idaho going to be any better than the other blend in Washington state? There's really no logical reason for so many damn blends of gasoline.
This reminds me of a road trip to California (will never do that again!) that in Texas, regular unleaded gasoline has an average octane rating of 87. Mid-range is 89, and super unleaded is 92-93, depending on the brand. Well, my dad and I were on this road trip, and when we got to California, gas prices were at least 2 dollars higher than Texas, but also lower in octane rating caused our van's engine to start "missing" like it couldn't get the energy, even almost stalling if you tried to gun the engine. We figured out after discovering the octane ratings were lower in California that we ended up having to use California's Super-Unleaded which was 86-87(!?!?) while their version of regular unleaded had an octane rating of 77-78! It was nuts!
-Jon
like many things, its all in the timing...
Submitted by dmacleo on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 3:08pm.
CA ignition systems usually run a more retarded timing setting (boy is that a fitting statement) for this. I forget now but iirc there's approx 4-6 deg difference in some systems.
less octane means more btu's per gallon but the fuel mix ignites way too easy.
end up losing efficiency...again, another fitting statement for CA.
Let's not forget, besides
Submitted by Scuba Dude on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 3:04pm.
Let's not forget, besides constantly harping on the price of gas when Pres. Bush was in office the LSM was reminding us daily of the casualties our troops suffered in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Of course this is all swept under the rug since President Downgrade took office. They are libturd scum whose days lying to the American people would end already.
Outta control
Submitted by Dave the mailman on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 3:26pm.
Obama 'felt our pain' about gas prices back in 08, but now scolds us for driving inefficient SUVs. What a difference an election makes.
Obama and his cronies are all
Submitted by helomech on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 6:17pm.
Obama and his cronies are all 'do as I say, not as I do'
More refineries, more drilling, more synthetic fuels, less EPA, less DOE, and no more Lib restrictions
LOL - right
Submitted by Clevenative on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 9:02pm.
You really are looking forward to that "End of Days" thing, aren't you?
You left out the FDA and - banning unions and collective bargaining, privatizing Social Security and Medicare, and on and on.
Pretty soon you'll be right there in your libertarian paradise - every man for himself. Right on par with Somalia. Third World America here we come. You folks already have us halfway there. Keep up the good work.
FYI More drilling or even increased oil production will not lower the cost of gas. You can keep believing that, but it's simply not true. The United States simply doesn't have enough oil to move world markets. Plus, any increase would be offset by OPEC.
One of these days you people will pull your heads out of your collective a* and realize, like the rest of the world, that the world's future energy source is not fossil fuels or finite resources. To diss the future simply for stubborn political and ideological egotistical pride - and refusing to admit that you have been scammed by Big Oil into ignoring the serious nature of Climate Change being caused by greenhouse gas emissions - and to fight to uphold the status quo out of selfishness and greed for short-term financial gains - is simply immoral. You might not get it - but I'm sure your grandchildren who are left to deal with with your raped earth will.
You are truly full of it, Clevenaive,---
Submitted by matthewdean on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 9:33pm.
but you have at least established a position here that makes the phrase "from the ridiculous to the sublime" an appropriately descriptive one.
MD
Just to point out a couple of things...
Submitted by beauxdog on Fri, 11/18/2011 - 5:38am.
The price of commodities, such as gasoline, is largely supply and demand, and other factors like world (source) stability. A substantial increase in oil production in the US will not only increase the supply, but stabilize it as well.
And OPEC is not as stupid as you think they are. A substantial increase in oil production in the US will diminish the demand for their product, ergo, diminish their revenues. Their income is not derived from the PRICE of oil... it is derived by selling their oil. By reducing their output to balance the increase in ours... would be suicide. They would be propping up the price for a product we have more of to sell of and they would have less of. Right now, the price of oil is screaming for us to exploit our reserves. It is economical now to produce low output wells as well as drill for more difficult oil to get to. If we had a president that was willing to drop the barriers to drilling and production, OPEC would have to drop their prices immediately to discourage our companies from doing so. If it is cheaper to buy from OPEC than produce ourselves... we will buy from OPEC. With an environmentalist wacko leftist as a President... OPEC laughs all the way to the bank.
I studied oil shale in high school (1970s) with my Professor of Geology grandfather who studied oil shale in the 1950s. It seems that in the US, there are more barrels of "oil" trapped in oil shale in just the Greenriver formation in the mid-west than there ever was in liquid petroleum. The problem was it was far more expensive to produce and transport than liquid petroleum. As the price and scarcity of liquid petroleum goes up, oil shale becomes more and more economic to produce. With that, better and better technologies are developed to produce it cheaper.
Moral of the story is that we are not going to run out of fossil fuels anytime soon... just the cost of producing those fuels is going to go up... until one day... in the future... the technologies will emerge that will make non-fossil fuels more economical.
The problem is that people like you are trying to force that day to come long before it is due. You run around and squawk like Chicken Little that the sky is falling. You lie to us about MAN MADE climate change because it fits your world view and agenda. MAN MADE climate change is a tactic used to increase the power of government over the people. As for the science... follow the money. You are a scientist... you have a choice... make millions being Chicken Little or get run out of the business because you are not politically correct.
The oil companies are in essence "energy" companies and it is in their best interest to be at the forefront of developing those future non-fossil fuel technologies... their future depends on it.
Here ya go, Chicken Little...
Submitted by beauxdog on Fri, 11/18/2011 - 6:08am.
To show you how significant mankind is to mother earth...
If you brought together every man, woman and child on the earth (this is just a visualization test... I know this is impossible) and gave them one square yard to stand in... how large of an area would they take up? Texas?... Alaska?... Australia?... Europe?
There are approximately 7 billion people on earth.
There are 3,097,600 square yards per square mile.
7B / 3,097,600 = 2259.8 square miles.
This is a little larger than DELAWARE... or about half of Connecticut.
Yes, Virginia, mankind is but a pimple on the ass of the world. Think of that next time someone claims our activities are enough to change the physical world as a whole.