Saturday, February 04, 2006

From Fox News, this report:
the Labor Department report showed the January unemployment rate dropped to a 4-1/2-year low 4.7 percent from 4.9 percent in December. The last time the rate was lower was in July 2001 when it was at 4.6 percent.

The closely watched monthly report reflected a relatively vigorous labor market that was likely to fan concern that a tightening labor market could produce stiffer wage demands.


What I'm finding a little confusing is that Fox News also posted this news:
The number of U.S. workers making new claims for unemployment benefits rose slightly last week to 283,000, the government said on Thursday, although a more reliable long-term measure of claims fell to its lowest in 5-1/2 years.

The Labor Department said initial claims for state jobless aid rose 11,000 in the week ended Jan. 21 from an upwardly revised 272,000 the prior week.

Wall Street economists had forecast initial claims would rise to 305,000 from the initially reported 271,000 the previous week.

The four-week moving average of initial claims, which smooths weekly volatility for a more reliable indication of underlying employment trends, fell by 10,750 to 288,750, the lowest level since July 2000.


It's the same basic news, right? The best unemployment news in 4 1/2 years.

So, why was the first heading "Weekly Jobless Claims Fall Unexpectedly", and the second "Weekly Jobless Claims Up Slightly"? I'm wondering why Fox had 2 stories about the same basic situation. Was it just to allow a reporter to get the second headline showing?

CNN has the cheerful news:
The unemployment rate fell to its lowest level in nearly five years in January, the government reported Friday, as employers added a respectable 193,000 jobs to payrolls.
Ohio is at 5.9%, my new state of South Carolina is at a staqgering 7.0%. That last number must be modified a little - it's the winter, and much of the state is rural.

Tags = Economy and Media

No comments: