If the Los Angeles Times wants an example of the type of reporting that drives its non-lefty critics nuts, they only need to look at this morning’s paper. Here’s how coverage of the new unemployment figures was reported elsewhere:

The Washington Post: Jobless Rate Drops To 4.7%
(subhead: 193,000 Jobs Added As Unemployment Hits 4 1/2-Year Low)

“The nation’s unemployment rate fell to 4.7 percent in January, the lowest since mid-2001 — a fresh sign that the economy is picking up steam and an additional source of pressure on the Federal Reserve Board to drive interest rates higher.”

The New York Times: Broad Rise in Hiring Last Month

“In one of the strongest job reports since the start of the recovery in late 2001, the government reported yesterday that the unemployment rate fell to 4.7 percent, its lowest level in more than four years. The nation’s employers hired workers in nearly every industry.”

The Wall Street Journal: Jobless Rate Falls To Lowest Level Since July 2001

“Job creation accelerated in January, pushing the unemployment rate to its lowest mark in more than four years and offering fresh evidence that the economy got off to a strong start this year.”

but count on our beloved Los Angeles Times to accentuate the negative: Falling Jobless Rate Boosts Wages but Fuels Concern on Prices and Profits

“A strong job report Friday helped revive a troubling theme prominent during the economic boom of the late 1990s: What’s good for workers may not necessarily be good for investors and monetary policymakers.” (emphasis ours)

It’s no wonder LAT columnist Michael Hiltzik sees nothing but economic gloom and doom — he reads his own paper.

Somehow reporter Bill Sing managed to find the bad news in recent months as well, commenting that “Friday’s job report provided strong evidence that the economy was rebounding from a surprisingly weak final three months of last year …” But the WSJ had a different take: “While the gain fell short of many analysts’ expectations, any disappointment was offset by revisions to December and November figures showing 81,000 more jobs were added than originally estimated.” The NYT called the increases during Q4′2005 “hefty.”

We also find this unattributed nugget: “Sluggish wage gains, along with lackluster job creation during the early part of the rebound from the 2001 recession, are a primary reason many Americans have been skeptical about the economy’s strength and dissatisfied with President Bush’s economic policies.”

We would love to see the poll that delves into the average American’s analysis of the alleged weakness of the now five year old recovery. Absent that, this sounds like conventional newsroom wisdom recycled as fact.

Yes, inflation is always a concern. But the LAT’s odd choice of emphasis looks to us like an agenda, not a creative take on the jobs report.

Technorati Tags: economy, LA Times, LAT, Los Angeles Times, media, Michael Hiltzik, New York Times, news media

This entry was posted on Saturday, February 4th, 2006 at 12:55 pm by A Senior Administration Official and is filed under Los Angeles Times. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.