I don’t think it’s exactly Orwellian. The NBER is the organization that has been calling recessions for almost 90 years. They haven’t been hiding the fact that they don’t use the pop-definition of what a recession is. I’s posted at their website.
http://www.nber.org/cycles/recessions_faq.html
“Q: The financial press often states the definition of a recession as two consecutive quarters of decline in real GDP. How does that relate to the NBER’s recession dating procedure?
A: Most of the recessions identified by our procedures do consist of two or more quarters of declining real GDP, but not all of them. As an example, the last recession, in 2001, did not include two consecutive quarters of decline. As of the date of the committee’s meeting, the economy had not yet experienced two consecutive quarters of decline.
Q: Why doesn’t the committee accept the two-quarter definition?
A: The committee’s procedure for identifying turning points differs from the two-quarter rule in a number of ways. First, we do not identify economic activity solely with real GDP, but use a range of indicators. Second, we place considerable emphasis on monthly indicators in arriving at a monthly chronology. Third, we consider the depth of the decline in economic activity. Recall that our definition includes the phrase, “a significant decline in activity.” Fourth, in examining the behavior of domestic production, we consider not only the conventional product-side GDP estimates, but also the conceptually equivalent income-side GDI estimates. The differences between these two sets of estimates were particularly evident in 2007 and 2008.”
Most people haven’t heard of the NBER because most people aren’t fascinated by economic arcana. Sports tend to be more entertaining. It’s a research organization studying the economy, independent of both government and business.
We use words to communicate and when the term “recession” is thrown around to describe something less than hard times it is done for a reason. I would suggest certain individuals and groups have political, social, and legal reasons to exaggerate the economy of the past seven or eight years. Their use of words to describe events which are not accurate is Orwellian.