| Yesterday, Blue Jersey parodied a statement by Gov. Christie that we thought was an overweening, embarrassing attempt to take credit for job growth figures that were at best inconclusive (and that a former Reagan official called "not even statistically significant".) Both Christie's wild pitch claim and the Reagan official's attempt to define the facts a little more carefully, came in the very same article - "Christie Crows About State Job Growth" (Wall Street Journal 12/16/10).
We were caustic, running a photoshopped image of Christie as George Bush declaring MISSION ACCOMPLISHED as he propagandized the Iraq War on the deck of the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln in 2003. This flipped out Blue Jersey's resident troll who thinks the fact Christie didn't utter the words "mission accomplished" means he wasn't saying just that. And Christie himself just 2 hours later tried to distance himself from the idea that he was declaring MISSION ACCOMPLISHED, by denying it in exactly those words.
But Columbia Journalism Review now adds another dimension to this: "WSJ Parrots Governor Christie on Jobs" (CJR 12/16/10). CJR is a respected publication for professional journalists. They report on professional ethics, trends in publishing, how journalists develop their stories. It's published by Columbia Journalism School, arguably the best academic training for reporters and editors in the country, and the administrators of the Pulitzer Prize.
CJR's "WSJ Parrots Governor Christie on Jobs" is worth your reading in entirety, though I'll pull out some key points from their analysis of how WSJ reported Christie's claims:
If you're going to do a story about a governor trying to take credit for creating jobs, you have to report context, otherwise you might as well reprint the governor's press releases.
CJR to WSJ: Don't fall for the "uncertainty meme".
WSJ lets Christie get away with presenting a "single month snapshot" of the economy and then, miraculously considering WSJ's financial beat, asks no questions and provides no context for those figures.
WSJ fails to mention regional factos in NJ job numbers (CJR points out the regional impact of NYC's job spurt is a major factor in NJ's numbers).
WSJ fails to note national context (which actually helps Christie's case).
Columbia Journalism Review's analysis (read it) is important, because Gov. Christie (and his party) claim to represent the interests of business and seek to appeal to business interests. Right or wrong, this is where Christie wants to stake his claim, and the Wall Street Journal is the most important business publication in the country. How WSJ reports on Gov. Christie's economic claims is critically important. If they simply transcribe his utterings without applying professional journalistic standards well enough, then the nation's business view of NJ has less chance to be grounded in fact, and the account we will read of the Governor's initiatives may be less accurate than it should be. Right or wrong, what the Wall Street Journal says about New Jersey's economic condition matters and CJR is right to call them on it. |
.gif)
