Posted on 10/01/2009 8:37:45 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Unemployment is currently at a 26-year-high of 9.7 percent and expected to continue rising. The last president to govern with such high unemployment was President Ronald Reagan.
But in 1982, when unemployment was rising similarly to the way it has in 2009 the network news media were merciless quoting attacks from Democrats, union leaders and the unemployed to attack Reagan's "sadistic" fiscal policies.
2009 was a different story, for a different president. Even though unemployment has shot up from 8.1 percent since February, network reporters looked for "hopeful signs" of an economic turnaround in their jobs report.
The Business & Media Institute just released a Special Report: Networks Flip Flop on Jobs that exposes that double-standard of unemployment coverage from 1982 and 2009 (See video below). The full report is available here, but here are some of our major findings:
Network Reports 13 Times More Negative Under Reagan than Under Obama: An overwhelming majority of stories mentioning the Reagan administration were negative 91 percent (20 out of 22) while only 7 percent (1 out of 15) of Obama administration mentions were negative. Additionally, Obama mentions were favorable 87 percent of the time, but there were zero positive mentions of Reagan.
Networks Connect Reagan White House to Negative Jobs Numbers Almost Twice as Often as Obama: Unemployment stories in 1982 mentioned the Reagan administration 71 percent of the time (22 out of 31), but 2009 stories mentioned the Obama administration only 40 percent of the time (14 out of 35).
Charles Gibson: 9.4% Unemployment ‘Good News' (Obama) and also ‘All' Bad (Reagan): The unemployment rate reached 9.4 percent under Reagan and Obama. But ABC's Charles Gibson covered the identical rate very differently in 1982 than in 2009. Gibson told viewers May 7, 1982, "[T]here really isn't any good news in the statistics. All the numbers are bad." But by 2009, Gibson had turned into an optimist citing "good news" June 5 and "hope the economy may be finally turning the corner" Aug. 7.
—Julia A. Seymour is an assistant editor for the Business & Media Institute.
All explained in Moore’s new movie,
Propaganda.
As a point of comparison, May 1982 was the 17th month of Reagan’s first term. We are still 9 months into Obama’s first term.
To be fair, it would be better to compare the results of Reagan’s economic policies vs. Obama’s economic policies at roughly equivalent points in their administration’s progression.
As a point of comparison, May 1982 was the 17th month of Reagan’s first term. We are still 9 months into Obama’s first term.
To be fair, it would be better to compare the results of Reagan’s economic policies vs. Obama’s economic policies at roughly equivalent points in their administration’s progression.
The MSM bias is as bad as the old Soviet Pravda......
BTTT
The years od late 70s and early 80s were extremely busy for me in the commercial construction and some of the highest earning years I had.
My highest income year to date was 1981/82, our fiscal year ended in June.
No bias here, no sirie..
We have heard silence from the democrat media about homelessness since The One assumed control. With all the foreclosures, has homelessness diminished?
Now there's a bit of hope and change, huh? Ain't socialism grand?
After the 86 “Tax Simplification Act” the construction business was destroyed and by 89 the illegals moved into commercial and by 92 I was losing so much that I shut down the business that was 57 years old.
Not only did commercial building cease but almost every contractor I knew closed up by 92.
I should have shut down in 90 but it was awful hard to close a 57 year old business and plowed over a quarter million in savings back into it hoping it would turn around.
I remember it well. Reagan's Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 reduced personal income tax rates by 23%, top rate dropped from 70% to 50% (TRA of 1986 reduced it from 50% to 28%); 10% exclusion on income for two-earner married couples; increase in estate tax exemption from $175,625 to $600,000; reduced Windfall Profit taxes; allowed all working taxpayers to establish IRAs; expanded provisions for employee stock ownership plans.
Those are sane fiscal policies. What was sadistic was the House not cutting spending, as Reagan policy reduced taxes.
I hope that you are talking about Jim Moore. He was my high school AP Chem teacher. That was/is one smart man. I would watch his movie!
Listening to ABC Radio News this morning was making me ill. They started out by how much positive economic news there was this morning. Than as the market went on to tank 200 points they conveniently dropped that line of BS. God, I hate ABC news with a passion.
“Those are sane fiscal policies. What was sadistic was the House not cutting spending, as Reagan policy reduced taxes.”
So “Reagan policy” cut taxes, but the sadists in the House did not cut spending. That’s interesting. I thought that all legislation had to be passed by the House (and the Senate), including tax cuts.
“After the 86 “Tax Simplification Act” the construction business was destroyed...”
Somehow, the government and “tax simplification” are mutually exclusive.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.