The Jobs Numbers, In Context

Context is one of the most important things a journalist can do.

There’s the old joke of a sportscaster giving out scores on the nightly news; 5 to 2, 7 to 0, 3 to 1. Without team names the numbers are useless, and the joke is funny when it comes to sports.

The Activist Old Media uses similar methods when it comes to the monthly unemployment numbers. They report the number of jobs that were “created” in a month, then fail to measure it against the number needed just to break even.

69,000 jobs created in May. In the graphic above CNN calls this the number of "jobs gained." What does that mean? Let’s add context. It takes at least 90,000 jobs created per month just for America to break even with job growth. That is the standard. As job growth is critical to this nations future, it’s important to know what the “break even” number is. Some have said the break even number is as high as 150,000 a month (New York Times number,) for the sake of argument, we'll take the lower number (don't say we don't give Obama a break.) Clearly 69,000 jobs were not "gained."

90,000 to break even with job growth is a number that every American should know when they are told employment figures, but few do. The media fails to provide that context.

Instead of saying 69,000 jobs were "gained" in May, it should be reported that, “overall the economy lost at least 21,000 jobs.” In every graphic produced by the media, and in every report by the media, that 90,000 number should be considered.

When you take the last three months into consideration the number overall is 40,000 jobs lost. 230,000 jobs “created” and 270,000 needed to break even. Even an old sports guy like me can do this math. This is a simple and easy way for people to understand this vital issue and it paints the pathetic picture that the Obama Administration and Activist Old Media apparently like to hide.

The Obama Administration often likes to tell how many jobs were “created” in a month and they will never, never subtract the 90,000 “break even” number. Okay, they are partisans, we can’t expect honesty from them. We should expect it from the media. Whenever Barack Obama touts his success at “creating” jobs, the math should be done, and don’t get me started on the “jobs saved” number, that is just a joke and anybody using it should be ridiculed. I believe Obama feels that as Dear Leader, he has “saved” all of our jobs. Without him…

The 8.2% unemployment figure is another issue, and there is more deception there. The Feds ignore people who have left the job market, and over the last three years they have reduced the number of jobs available, which makes the percentage lower than it actually is. Another column for another day.

I know the message consultants and management types would give us in newsrooms and it would be to keep the information simple and straight. So, there you have it, I have simplified the information for my friends in the media to help them better communicate with their viewers/readers/listeners. I charge you nothing for my consultation here, times are tough out there.

British Media, Doing The Job The US Media Refuse to Do

It's been known for years that the US media has decided not to do its job when it comes to vetting Barack Obama, but when the British media is out there reporting critically on this White House on a daily basis, the contrast is startling.

If the Activist Old Media in this country had the ability to be embarrassed, they would cower in the corner over the way the British media pounds them on Obama coverage.

The America media chooses not to report these stories, it's not that they are getting "beaten" on them. Of course, that fact makes this much worse.

Dr. Tim Stanely of the UK Telegraph reports this week on the issue of President Obama's latest revelations of his "composite" girlfriend and the stories of him eating dog in Indonesia. In the last paragraph of his column Dr. Stanley says these issues should've been brought out long ago, since Obama wrote them in his book.


"That we are only discussing them this late into Obama’s career suggests that the vetting that should have happened four years ago was unforgivably neglected. But, hey, it’s never too late to start."


We'll see about the media and when/if it actually decides to start vetting this president. I have heard from many of my media friends that the vetting of Obama was already done, so it is not needed now. Of course, he was not vetted during the last election because the media did not want to vet him for fear of what they might find out, and besides, all their crews were in Alaska looking under rocks, glaciers, and inside igloos for Sarah Palin dirt. 

Another big story this week, reported by the British and ignored by the US media involves Navy SEALs voicing their disgust over Obama "spiking the football" on the killing of Osama bin Laden. Perhaps you heard, this week was the One Year Anniversary of the New National Holiday Honoring Obama For Shooting and Killing bin Laden. It's been in the news. This story about the Navy SEALs was not in the news, at least not here in the US. This story was in the UK Daily Mail Online. Perhaps the US media has forgotten that there is an internet and we can get these stories from the British media just as easily as we can get theirs. Click.


Of course, the US media is trying to control what we know and when we know it. They had been planning this Obama Celebration of The Killing of bin Laden, National Day of Honoring Dear Leader for weeks and they didn't want anybody ruining this party. Certainly not some British "rag." 


This was the president that the world was going to love and people across the planet were going to worship him as do the leftists in this nation. With the US media willingly in lock-step with the regime, the international media certainly would follow and the entire planet would bask in the glow of a Supreme Leader that would save us all from whatever we need to be saved from during the next 24 Second News Cycle. Seems the British media didn't get the memo. 


UPDATE May 3 11:00pm Pacific


The UK Guardian does a prominent story analyzing Osama bin Laden's thoughts on the US media. Seems bin Laden didn't like Fox News, but felt his terrorist group could make inroads with much of the other US media, like CBS and MSNBC. Again, a story from the British media that US media does not want to touch because....well, because it probably hits too close to home for them.