Replies

Here is a more complete picture.

March 15: Reported - 351,000, Revised - 353,000
March 22: Reported - 348,000, Revised - 364,000 Reported - down, Actual - up
March 29: Reported - 359,000, Revised - 363,000 Reported - down, Actual - up
April 05: Reported - 357,000, Revised - 367,000 Reported - down, Actual - up
April 12: Reported - 380,000, Revised - 388,000 Reported - up, Actual - up
April 19: Reported - 386,000, Revised - 389,000 Reported - down, Actual - up
April 26: Reported - 388,000, Revised - 392,000 Reported - down, Actual - up
May 03: Reported - 365,000, Revised - 368,000 Reported - down, Actual - down
May 10: Reported - 367,000, Revised - 370,000 Reported - down, Actual - up
May 17: Reported - 370,000, Revised - 372,000 Reported - no change, Actual - up
May 24: Reported - 370,000, Revised - TBD Reported - down, Actual - TBD

Notice that in 7 of the 9 weeks numbers were reported in the headlines as down since they compare the revised number with the new number. Yet when the comparison is revised vs. revised the actual trend is a very negative one.

The BLS staff makes Enron executives look like boy scouts in their dealing with numbers.