From Harvard's Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy:
Beginning in 2010, there was an overwhelming consensus in the American and British media—including the elite business press—that the euro currency zone’s breakup was both inevitable and imminent. Illustrious commentators competed for the most lurid scenarios of Eurogeddon.
But guess what? Shortly after Harvard historian Niall Ferguson published a Newsweek cover story boldly titled “The End of the Euro” in May 20101, the currency began an 11-month, 24-percent rally.Not only has the euro survived and retained its value, but the Eurozone even has three more member countries today than on the eve of the crisis. An investor blinded by the elite financial media’s repeated forecasts of Europe’s impending demise would have lost a bundle. In 2013, some of the best returns on any asset class worldwide were on the bonds and equities of European countries that the press had written off.
That’s not to say that all is well in Europe. But on the most fundamental and important question—whether the euro would continue to exist as a currency—the media have been getting the story spectacularly wrong, year after year.
Just as the parade of crime and disasters on the nightly news is only a highly distorted version of the actual world, so the economic and business news is but a skewed and selective snippet of the real economy. When it comes to political or general news, we’ve long been familiar with the way in which media skew reality through sound-bite-ism, a focus on personalities and conflict, and the preference of bad news over good. Media compete for attention, editors tend to pick the simplest and most familiar narratives and templates, and reporters often don’t question their sources or dig deep into a story. Why should we believe that business and economic journalism is free of these afflictions?
The quality of business and economic reporting matters. Just as the political conversation and the conduct of election campaigns have been fundamentally shaped and altered—not always for the better—by modern media culture, so the media have an outsized effect on economic life as well.
News stories drive investor behavior and influence consumer sentiment. From the work of behavioral economists like 2013 Nobel laureate Robert Shiller, we know that media-driven collective sentiment is one of the cues driving not-always-rational market trends. Media attention also affects policy debates on everything from business regulation to taxes to financial-sector bailouts.
Just as a vibrant press plays a crucial role in a healthy democracy, the media also have an indispensable watchdog role in business and economic affairs. At their best, journalists make sense of complex economic issues, dig into scandals that would otherwise go unseen, and shine light on government economic policies and their effects on businesses, jobs, consumers and taxpayers. Without smart and critical economic reporting, society would have far fewer defenses against special interests from Wall Street on down.
This paper goes beyond the usual anecdotes of stories mishandled by the press. Instead, I use data from media content analysis to highlight the systematic mistakes that editors and reporters repeatedly make when they cover the economy. These deeply ingrained biases and distortions are categorized into five major types. First, I will look at the media’s role in inflating bubbles, where uncritical bandwagon reporting plays an indispensable role in creating destructive crises in the market economy. Second, the same focus on personalities and dogfights that we know from political news systematically distorts business reporting as well. Third, media are drawn to big companies and well-known consumer brands like moths to a flame, at the expense of a
substantial invisible economy that flies under the media’s radar. Fourth, an obsession with short- term market movements and company numbers conveys more noise than signal, gives us dots of mostly useless and backwards-looking data instead of connecting the dots to a larger context, and takes company accounting at face value when experience teaches us not to place too much trust in those numbers. Last, a preference for bad news and worst-case scenarios often leads to doom-mongering, especially in times of crisis.By focusing on these systematic mistakes and the “newsroom mechanics” that lead to distorted reporting on the economy, this paper both avoids and goes beyond the usual fixation on the media’s alleged liberal or conservative political bias. In a final section, I will discuss some of the implications for journalism and propose some ways we could improve.
One final introductory note: This paper will be documented with data provided by Media Tenor, a Switzerland-based research consultancy that has assembled a 20-year database of over 110 million manually coded data points from U.S. and international print, broadcast and online media. Additional data were provided by the Pew Research Center’s Journalism Project in Washington, D.C. Keyword searches in the Factiva database were used as well.2
Bandwagoning and Bubbles....
....MUCH MORE
