There's news--lots of news--lots of bad news--in the Commerce Department's Bureau of Economic Analysis's "advance" release on GDP and the state of the economy in the fourth quarter of 2005. So I'm going to want to spend class on Tuesday, January 31 looking at (a) what the Thursday morning economic news was, and (b) how it was reported:
Here's how it was being covered on the morning of the 27:
Full report in pdf format at: http://www.bea.doc.gov/bea/newsrelarchive/2006/gdp405a.pdf
Economist (Kash Mansouri) Instant Reaction
Later on: Economists:
Menzie Chinn writes about the Trade Balance and the 2005:IV GDP Advance Release
Barry Ritholtz Reacts to the GDP Number
Tim Duy watches the Federal Reserve
Macroblog is disturbed And confused
Later on: Journalists:
The New York Times Saturday morning story: U.S. Economy Slowed Sharply at End of 2005 - New York Times: By EDUARDO PORTER and VIKAS BAJAJ .
I'd love to know what you said in class about a) what the news was. In your lead-in, you say there was plenty of "bad news" in the GDP report. But was it all bad? Did you mention that many Wall Street economists INCREASED their forecasts for Q1 GDP following the report? Is that just optimistic spin? Or is it Brad who's spinning the numbers? How do journalists keep these volatile numbers in perspective without falling for the spin of those with an agenda (such as politicians, bloggers or Wall Street economists)?
Posted by: fred c. dobbs | February 09, 2006 at 01:55 PM