AP's Crutsinger 'Clings to Recession' Despite Improving Data

Photo of Tom Blumer.
By Tom Blumer | May 8, 2008 - 09:58 ET

The Associated Press's business writers just won't let go of their claim (or is it audacious hope?) that we are in a recession -- not heading towards one, but actually in one.

Despite yet another decent economic report, this one on productivity, the AP's Martin Crutsinger downplayed a significant beating of expectations, and continued to invoke the R-word (bolds are mine):

Worker productivity rose by a better-than-expected amount in the first three months of the year while labor cost pressures eased.

The Labor Department reported Wednesday that productivity, the amount of output per hour of work, increased at an annual rate of 2.2 percent in the first quarter. That was slightly higher than the 1.5 percent increase that had been expected.

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

Analysts read the bigger-than-expected rise in productivity and the smaller increase in unit labor costs as a good sign that inflation pressures, at least on the labor front, are remaining under control and the country is not facing the danger of a wage-price spiral.

..... Many analysts think the country has already toppled into a recession. But overall economic growth, as measured by the gross domestic product, eked out a tiny 0.6 percent rate of increase in the first three months of the year, the same anemic pace as the final three months of last year.

I did the math just to make sure -- 2.2% is 47% higher than 1.5%. Additionally, the 2.2% first-quarter performance was higher than the 1.8% reported for the fourth quarter of 2007, while expectations were that it would come in lower. "Slightly," schmightly, Martin.

Consider the other economic news of the past week that Crutsinger had to blow past with his assertion that "many (unnamed) analysts" think that the US has "already toppled into a recession":

  • The Institute for Supply Management (ISM) Manufacturing Index released a week ago, covering about 15% of the economy -- contracting, but barely, and holding steady.
  • Last Friday's Employment report -- Unemployment rate down to 5.0%, seasonally adjusted job losses smaller than previous months.
  • ISM's Non-Manufacturing index, covering the remaining 85% of the economy, including the troubled housing and financial-services sectors -- Moved significantly into expansion mode in April, blowing away expectations that it would further slip into contraction.

Topping all of that, the ISM issued its Spring Semiannual Economic Forecast Tuesday. The press release for the report had these headlines:

ISMeconPredix0508

The weighted average of the expected 1% increase in manufacturing revenues and the 2.7% increase in non-manufacturing is about 2.4%. That's not spectacular growth by any stretch, but it's a far cry from negative growth.

Yet the AP's Crutsinger and his unnamed analysts continue to "cling to recession." Excuse me for believing that he, his business-reporting co-workers at AP, and their oft-unnamed agenda-driven "analysts" will continue their clinging until, oh, about early November.

Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com.

—Tom Blumer is president of a training and development company in Mason, Ohio, and is a contributing editor to NewsBusters

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.

Do they cling to a

Do they cling to a recession like conservatives "cling" to guns and religion?

"They need to have a course in college called common sense and everyone should take it. Problem is there isn't too many people that could pass or teach it." -my grandfather

Worse

The "clinging to guns and religion" Obama claims others do is in his ignorant imagination.

The "clinging to recession" by the business press is all too real.

Sorry I should have pointed

Sorry I should have pointed out it was a rhetorical question with a hint of sarcasm at the end.

But you answered it well.

"They need to have a course in college called common sense and everyone should take it. Problem is there isn't too many people that could pass or teach it." -my grandfather

Worser?

Biz media ridin' dirty with the DNC?

Responsibility

 And by November it will be two years of control of the House and Senate by the Democratic party who's only accomplishment has been passing a minimum-wage increase.  Good job liberals.  This is leadership we can all depend on at a 22% approval rating.

Rovin

Larry Elder provides some history:

He concludes his article with: 

By October of 1992, when President George Herbert Walker Bush ran for re-election against Bill Clinton, the economy was 18 months into a recovery. But as Investor's Business Daily noted, 90 percent of the newspaper stories on the economy were negative. Yet the following month, when Clinton defeated Bush-41, suddenly only 14 percent of economic news stories were negative!

But only a cynic would suggest a liberal media bias. And you know me better than that.

 h/t to townhall.com

 "The worst economy in 50 years."

  MSM - shaping all the perceptions you need to believe.

flip side (if economy fails)

The media have at least a thousand ways to explain how the new democrat administration is not to blame for the economy should it actually tank (not saying it is) because as we all know it will be the Republicans fault and they should be able to stretch that out for at least 4 years and try to get a Dem re-elected.
IMO, the only way I see the economy failing rapidly is with complete Democrat control pushing Healthcare, Amnesty and other programs. Otherwise, unless there is a drastic cut in spending, no, that wasn't a joke, and the economy will chug along for a while but the hemorrhaging will begin to become impossible to stop as more boomers retire.

The Associated Press's

The Associated Press's business writers just won't let go of their
claim (or is it audacious hope?) that we are in a recession...

Of course they won't. They know the Democrats need to run on another "Bush Recession," ("the worst economy in 50 years!"). Or they might choose to call it "the worst economy since the first Bush Recession!" ;-)

 

They'll Cling Longer Than That

If McCain is elected, you can expect reporting like this for the next four years.

On the other hand, if Obama is elected, expect reporting like this to fade away in the 1st quarter of 2009. That is, once "the market greets the new administration enthusiastically" and "the new administration's policies have started making their impact".

It will be sooner than that

Christmas Shopping Season, 2008. Count on it.

In Xmas 1992, all of sudden it was ringing cash registers and happy shoppers -- all because Bill Clinton was elected. He wasn't even inaugurated, and he was saving the economy. Rush ripped into this on his then-TV show.

You notice how they've almost never shown ringing registers and the money-printing presses since about, oh December 2000?

Much like the whole global

Much like the whole global warming issue is continually flogged, despite evidence to the contrary!  The evidence itself is spun to reinforce their agenda.

Listening to their constant drone of doomsday reporting while trying to keep your glimmer of common sense alive is like trying to overcome the effects of anesthesia:  You can count backward all you like but the blanket of fog and darkness is going to bury you unless someone takes out the anesthetist! 

"Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war"  - Shakespeare

Helen, regarding your

Helen, regarding your global warming comment:

Soon we will be seeing reports that say "Despite global warming, temperatures remained at record lows throught the South yesterday!"

facts seem to have little currency

The facts seem to have little currency on either side in the prevailing political environment. While we are techincally not in a resession, there are disturbing forces at play in the economy. For instance, each day their are fewer dollars b/c of the bursting of the credit bubble. Usually as things become more scarce they get more valuable, but the value of each dollar continues to fall as they become more scarce. And we import so much of what we consume this means that the economy is slowing while inflation is increasing, aka "stagflation". And as far as credit contraction causes the economy to slow, there is no end in sight. OTOH logic would tend to dictate that the dollar will stop falling at some point due to the decreasing number in circulation. But that will ironically slow the increase of exports and the increase of foreign investment in the USA.

In any case, all of the political talk about the economy is "sound-and-fury", as concerns economic fact, though we can expect this BS to increase during the general election. To bad its so specious, if it were real the price of fertilizer would drop by 75%.

Good news on the economy

Not only have we had the recent report that the economy was up, albeit slightly, in the first quarter, but these two headlines were on Drudge just this morning (5/7):

UP: WAL-MART same-store sales top expectations...

HAPPY MEAL: MCDONALD'S sales rise 5% in April...

Obviously, this is just a little anecdotal evidence that is not enough to make a case, but the economic news lately is seems to be just positive enough to belie the media's claims that we're in a recession. I prefer President Bush's description: a "rough patch".

If we keeps the Dems in control of Congress, which seems likely, and especially if we elect Obama, that rough patch is likely to turn as thick as a rain forest.

When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.

AP's writing on recessions, then and now

My local partisan newspaper, the Telegram & Gazette in Worcester, Mass., has run an AP story on the claimed current recession or tough economic times and unpleasant news on most days this year, along with similar stories from the New York Times News Service and Bloomberg News. I've read about how the economy will hurt Republicans, a shrinking services sector, fewer luxury cars being sold--as a headline claimed, "When the affluent spend less, many affected," railcars being idled somewhere in Montana, people raiding their retirement funds to get money, and much more, including this: 

 "Rising food and fuel prices, falling interest rates and screeching declines in worldwide stock markets have [Lea] Wait and thousands of other retirees paring spending to levels some haven't seen in decades, forgoing dinners out, cutting back on groceries and canceling plans to visit grandchildren." (Without going into personal detail, I don't think all retirees have reacted the same way to "screeching" declines in stock markets, or so altered their lives that they are "canceling plans to visit grandchildren.")

I hope that someone will have the time and resources to compare current economic news coverage with how the mainstream news media covered the recession that started in 2000 and ended early in 2003. That should be illuminating. (The timing and duration of that recession are in dispute, as is the question of whether the U.S. economy is currently in recession.) I recall nothing from  a fw years ago that matches the intensity of the current attempt to provide bad economic news.

Consumer confidence and thus consumer spending are important to the economy--and the press has done all it can to undermine confidence. Why? Perhaps many journalists lust for an Obamination. That collapses Obama Administration into one, more descriptive, word, and also references his desire to remake the nation, almost surely as Fidel Castro wanted to remake Cuba.

 

 

 

 

What really bothers me ..

Is their attempt to redefine what recession is. A recession is two consecutive quarters of GDP shrinkage. Anything shorter is simply a blip. They would define a single quarter of shrinkage as "recession" or even a single month if they could get their hands on data that granular.

Words have definitions for a reason. There really is a definition for "blizzard", for example that is different than "flurry". You can call a flurry a blizzard, but after a while of doing that, your words begin to lose value. And so if the media continues to press that a single quarter of shrinkage is a "recession" then they will have to go off an invent a new word for whatever is "real" recession. When a Republican is in office it would probably be a "Depression".

The journalism trade has become such a sham. The sad thing is that there is nobody to blame but the "journalists" themselves. The real journalism is going on these days on the Internet with people like Yon and Totten and others. I wonder if there is any good economics journalism on the net ... oh, I almost forgot about Walter E. Williams from George Mason University.

2 consecutive quarters of

2 consecutive quarters of negative gdp growth is a common definition, but it is not set in stone. recession really refers to period of economic contraction that isn't excessively prolonged. While some go by the 2 quarters definition, others like the NBER go by a different definition. On the CFA Institute's exams recession is not tested as 2 consecutive quarters definition. My point is economists have many different ways to labeling economic contraction as recession and the "2 quarters of negative gdp growth" is not used universally.

Eke, and Anemic

"But overall economic growth... eked out a tiny 0.6 percent rate of increase in the first three months of the year, the same anemic pace as the final three months of last year."

Suppose that economic growth fell by 0.6 in the quarter. Do you think they would use the same emphasis: "economic growth fell slightly, at the same insignificant rate as last year"? Or would they say something like "ecomomic growth plunged 0.6 in the quarter, continuing the same devastating trend begun at the end of 2007"?

I dunno -- difficult for me to choose....

___________________________________ 

If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it is in English, thank a Soldier. - My barber

Tom. Crustywhiner said...

Tom. Crustywhiner said.... Many analysts think the country has already toppled into a recession

You know, technically, he's probably correct. There are many. A friend of mine (with a "Change" bumper sticker) told me that his "analysis" tells him that we're in a recession.  

Of course, if Crustywhiner was an ethical and responsible journalist, he would have said, Most analysts understand that the country has not fallen into a recession.

Thanks for keeping on top of their political spin. (;~> gary