No, this is not new: this call for a boycotty of Tox by this blog (at least as a regular source of "news", rather than surfing just to get some input yu can mostly IGNORE, except to read between the lines as you have o do with all of the media). That is why I have had to give myself another, Obama-type WAIVER to mention Fox, as otherwise the name is banned from this blog (much as G. Gordon Liddy refuses to mention the Washington Post by name). For this blog, "Fox' is forever after known as "the unfair and unbalanced network", except when I grant myself one of these infrequent waivers to make sure readers know exactly who I am talkin abut. "Unbalanced"", by the way, does not mean I think Fox is esepcially "conservative". I thinkk exactly the opposite. I use "unbalanced" in terms of my view of the cable TV mentality: a strange kind of media insantiy where both approval of the "hated" mainstream media and a total disinterest in FACTS (as with all others in the regular media) cause "unbalanced' peple to lie aobut being 'journalists".
Okay. Enugh. What did Fox actually DO this time? Yes, they LIED. But it is worse than that. They LIED when at least PART of the mainstream media go it partly right, and hey did so based on LIES that this blog exposed back in February: yes, the very sAME LIES. This same LIE has now been REPEATED by the media-includng Fox-at least THREE TIMES this very same year.
What is the lie? It is that an INITIAL report of 350,000 or less in new unemplyment claims is the "lowest in four years". That is an outright LIE, based on the same LIE that this blog exoses every single week. You need a litatle background. "Jobless claims" (new unemplyemnt claims" fell to 351,000 in early February (or maybe even late January, althugh I think early February). Okay, that WAS essentaily the 'lowet level in four yars", althouh it turned out it was FICTIONAL (as is this Thrusday's number). The number of new unemplyment claims (for the previous week) is released every Thursday. But that number is SEASONALLY ADJUSTED, and that "easonal adjustment" can skew the number (especaily around holidays, and times hmes when businesses ordinariyly close down plants for retooling in summer vacatin, but choose NOT to do it at the "expected" time for some reason or other--as hapened in early July either last year or the year before when auto companies failed to have their usual plant shutdown at the expected time). But that problem in the "seasonal adjustment" is not the main reason Fox is composed of LIARS. This bog has long exosed the LIE that these weekly jobless cllaims numbers are "concrete" numbers. They are not. They are SUBJECTIVE numbers, and one week means almost NOTHING by itsellf (especially if it is an obvius aberration, as is true of this week's number). No. The main reason Fox peole are blatant LIARS is the REVISION.
The number of new unemplyment claims released each Thursday is REVISED the next Thursday. Since that number first reached 3510,000, early this year (since which time the number has DETERIORATED, after staying at that fictional level for a number of weks), there hwave been at least TWO LYING HEADLINES (in February alone)--mabye even three--abut how the number has "fallen" to a NEW four year low. Probme. How can you repeat the SAME HEADLINE, using the SAME number, and not be a LIAR? you can't. These peole are LIARS. Thus, AFTER the jobless claims had reached 3510,000, there was a weeek when the INTIAL report was that the new unemplyment claims had rached 350,000: a "new four year low". At the time, IN FORESIGHT, this blog told you that was a LIE, because the intial number is ALWAYS revised UPWARD. It was, and the headline was PROVWN to be a lie (as evidenced by the fact it has been used AGaiN). It happened a scond time. The intial number was 348,000. Again, that was the INITIAL number, and not the revised number. Again, this blog told yo that the mediaa headline wa a LIE : the REPEATED headline that new unemplyment claims had reached a new four year low. Again, the REVISION the nex week PROVED the media to be LIARS (comparing apples and oranges; comaping unrevised numbers with revised numbers). Now, for the THIRD TIME, the media--or at least the LIARS in the media such as those of Fox--are saying that the SAME NUMBER (not even as LOW as the 348,000 that was really the "low" of this year as far as the INTIAL number is concerned) to say that the joless calims have reached a "new four year low". Again, that is a LIE. Yes, IF the number were to STAY at 350,000, it would not be a lie., but that almost NEVER happens. The nmber is ALWAYS revised UPWARD. For examplle, the initial number reported last week wsa 374,000. That number ws REVISED this week to 376,000 . Now this blog had told you the "real" number was likely 377,000 (based ont the usual 3,0000 upward revision). Ntotice, however, that this blog was still MORE RIGHT than the media, who reported the 374,00 nummber as if it were not gong t be revised.
Here, by the way , is the CORRECT headline, as featured (amazingly enough) from Yahoo "News' thi morning (maybe form the AP, althguh I did not pay attentin and it would be amazing for the despicable peole of the AP to get this right):
"Jobless claims fall, as plants put off retooling".
Now, the story itself almsot surely repreated the LIE that the 350,00 numbr is the lowest number in four years, but I did not see it in the first fe w paragraphs. So I have to give the mainstream media writers of this particular story, and the headline writer, credit for getting it RIGHt. As the headline suggests, this number is FICTIN--based totally on the way the "seasonal adjustment" was distorted. The "labor market" did not actually "improve'. The reported number was TOO GOOD (even though NOT better than numbers reported in February, and not actually "good'). The supposed "drop" of 26,000 was TOO MUCH. There is NO EVIDENCE that the econmy, or the job market, is "improving" that suddenlly. So the number is FICTIN, and the above headlne explains why it is cficiton resulting from the "seasonal adjustment" not working. This blog will have a definittive analysis of the sitautin in another article today or tomorrow, not focusing on Fox, but I jsut could not let the LIARS of Fox get away with this atorcity. My "Fox" radio "news" mnute actually hd the GALL (liars that they are) to say that the stock market "shrugged off the lowest jobless claims in four years". Sob. I can't even laugh at peole this STuPID. Nor can I forgive them. Id o NOT FORGIVE THEM. This is the kind of thing that led to the BAN of "Fox" from this blog, and my BOYCOTT of Fox "News", except for surfing in non-prime time just for purposes of knowing soemthing about what is beng "reported" ut there (as I do with CNN and MNBC--to a lesser degeree with the openly partisan MSNBC).
P.S. No proofreadng or spell checking (bad eyesight).