Posted on 02/07/2007 6:10:28 AM PST by presidio9
The White House press corps has cut U.S. presidents few breaks for the past 48 years on the topic of the economy during news conferences, but journalists tend to be creampuffs when it comes to foreign affairs, a new study shows.
Statistical analysis of White House transcripts from four randomly selected White House news conferences for every year beginning with the Eisenhower administration and through President Clinton's showed that journalists' questions become more aggressive when the economy turns south, said sociologist Steven E. Clayman of UCLA, who headed up the study.
For every 1 percent increase in the unemployment rate, Clayman and his colleagues found a 16 percent increase in the odds of more hard-hitting questions from reporters. And 1 percent increases in the prime interest rate brought about a 5 percent increase in aggressiveness on all topics--foreign and domestic.
"Nothing makes the watchdog bark more readily than a downturn in the economy," Clayman said.
Oddly, changes in the Dow Jones index and the inflation index had no effect.
The sociologists examined reporters' questions and their shapes for aspects of aggressiveness, including directness, adversarial tones and demands for accountability. For instance, questions that started with "I wonder whether" and "I would like to ask" were scored as less aggressive, while questions starting with "How could you ..." and "Why did you ..." were scored as more aggressive.
The effect of the nation's economy on aggressive questions was found to be independent of the president's ratings. The team also found that reporters dive right in with bold questions at the beginning of a president's term.
"We didn't find any statistical evidence of a honeymoon period," said Clayman's colleague John Heritage, a co-author of the research published in the February issue of the journal American Sociological Review.
And journalists' tendency to become aggressive is more responsive to the state of the nation than a presidents' approval ratings, Heritage said, though second termers face harder questions than first termers.
However, a common perception--that the press corps goes easy on presidents when it comes to defense--was borne out by the study on one level:? Reporters were twice as likely to be aggressive on domestic affairs as they were on military matters and foreign affairs.
The UCLA team said this discrepancy could reflect citizens' current concerns. For the most part, journalists become more aggressive questioners when citizens want them to be, Clayman said.
"At least in the domestic affairs arena," he said, "journalists are being reasonably good watchdogs."
Depends on which party they are from.
Edward R. Murrow was a journalist.
The White House Press Corps are reporters, and only just.
The Blue Dress:
When news of the the existence of the dress surfaced in published reports in early August, politicians and commentators alike agreed that the blue dress proved Clinton lied when he denied a sexual relationship with Lewinsky. Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) called the evidence "very critical." Senator Arlen Spector (R-Pa) agreed that it would be "the most powerful kind of corroboration" of an affair. A George Washington law professor, Jonathan Turley, appearing on "Meet the Press" said of the semen stain: "No one will be able to spin him out of that."
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/clinton/lewinskydress.html
Compare and Contrast their Reporting of the mythical "Clinton Economy" with their trash talking of the Economy during both Reagan and Bushs 2 Presidency. Based on just the basic economic data the Economy performed better under Reagan and Bush then under Clinton.
The difference was under Reagan or Bush the reporting is "here is the good news now listen while we spend all our time spinning the good news as not really all that good"
Compared with the Clinton years where the "Journalists" spend all their time on the verge of verbal hysteric over what was not really such good economic news.
Washington Post touts low unemployment, strong economy; credits President [FLASHBACK]
Washington Post Archives | May 4, 1996 | John M. Berry; Washington Post Staff Writers
Posted on 01/07/2006 8:14:50 AM PST by nwrep
In sharp contrast to yesterday, when the 4.9% unemployment rate was described by the MSM as "weak numbers", the media was tripping over itself in 1996 while reporting the 5.6% unemployment under President Clinton in 1996 as evidence of a rosy economy and good policies by the administration. Below is how the Post described the news. Notice that it buried the weaker than expected payroll growth deep in the report, while yesterday it lead most of the major newscasts, which downplayed the unemployment numbers.
The unemployment rate dropped to 5.4 percent, its lowest level in 14 months, the government reported yesterday, capping a week of good economic news for the country -- and great news for President Clinton's reelection bid. Wages are rising at their fastest pace in five years, consumer confidence is soaring, and business and consumer spending has fueled an unexpectedly strong burst of economic growth.
Driving into work this morning on the GW Parkway, I glanced over to the right at a woman driving Toyota, and she appeared to be a cross between Helen Thomas and Betty Friedan. My God, I nearly drove into the Potomac!
Looked like she was smelling rotten eggs.
This was back in the Kennedy days and even then, the old time journalists were scratching their heads about the "empty suits" elbowing into their profession. The younger people lacked passion, humor, and common sense and even then tended to be ideologues.
In the years since, journalists have become news readers, primarily concerned about how they look on camera, educated in increasingly leftist J-schools where they are graded on political correctness rather than thinking and writing ability. I see them struggling to apply political correctness to the international scene. It's so clearcut at home where white men are always bad and minorities always good. They don't have a clue who to bash in a complex situation like Sunni vs. Shi'ite.
"The unemployment rate dropped to 5.4 percent, its lowest level in 14 months, the government reported yesterday, capping a week of good economic news for the country -- and great news for President Clinton's reelection bid. Wages are rising at their fastest pace in five years, consumer confidence is soaring, and business and consumer spending has fueled an unexpectedly strong burst of economic growth. "
Very important quote MN, thank you.
"....and business and consumer spending has fueled an unexpectedly strong burst of economic growth. "
Liberals inadvertantly admitting that money in the hands of the people causes economic growth and conversly, if not in their hands, it will cause stagnation.
Very key. Thanks, again.
Happy Birthday, Mr. President.
Oh, come on now. Nothing makes Big Journalism challenge the president like the president being a Republican. Period.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.