What is Pro-Growth Bias?

Pro-Growth Bias is reflected in the media by the stories and words chosen, which hint and often trumpet that economic, population, and consumption growth is good and essential. We're here to expose the bias and encourage more balanced and thoughtful journalism. Here you can vote, discuss, and even post stories exemplifying the bias.

Help bust pro-growth bias in the media. Join the Truth Squad.
Donate Now

Explore all our non-profit sustainability initiatives at GrowthBusters.

Register to get email alerts or submit stories.

NewYork Times: Economic Engines Not Revving Enough

Posted by on in Wall of Shame
  • Font size: Larger Smaller
  • Hits: 442
  • 3 Comments
  • Subscribe to this entry
  • Print

Yesterday we hoisted U.S. President Barack Obama onto the Wall of Shame for representing 4% GDP growth as good news and bragging, “our engines are revving.” Today, the New York Times Editorial Board joins the President, for opining that the engines aren’t revving enough. In Growth Without Jobs, the Times complains about, “job growth that is too weak, wages that are too low and workweeks that are too short.”

The Times editorial board provides us with the usual tripe about needing more work and higher pay. I am waiting for the board to step back and examine the assumptions behind this line of reasoning. Yes, we'd all like to see everyone who needs work meaningfully employed, and paid adequately. But does the editorial board really believe we live on a planet with the endless resources required to fuel ever more workers, working overtime to convert those resources into automobiles, houses and refrigerators?

Commenting on what they characterize as painfully slow growth in the number of jobs created, the writers presciently got this right:

“July’s relatively slow pace of growth may not be sustainable.”

But of course they didn’t mean that growth itself is not sustainable. They haven’t yet grasped that important concept. Send them a copy of The Limits to Growth, or The End of Growth. We need the New York Times Editorial Board to start getting these things right. Today that board is perpetuating a destructive myth by repeating it over and over and assuming it is unassailable, drilling into the public’s collective psyche that we are entitled to more, year after year.

The competition for biggest shame of the week is heating up, so be sure to vote. Comment below, and donate here to make sure this valuable media criticism and analysis continues. Thank you.

Last modified on
How much fame or shame?:
2

Comments

  • Guest
    Fons Jena Tuesday, 05 August 2014

    We already have to work to our 60's and then we would have to lengthen our workweek? This does not contribute to our quality of life, which is the main purpose of an economic system. The exhaustion of the Earth and the human spirit continues...
    http://users.skynet.be/fb040380/competition.jpeg

  • Guest
    Fons Jena Tuesday, 05 August 2014

    We already have to work to our 60's and then we would have to lengthen our workweek? This does not contribute to our quality of life, which is the main purpose of an economic system. The exhaustion of the Earth and the human spirit continues...
    http://users.skynet.be/fb040380/competition.jpeg

  • Guest
    Fons Jena Tuesday, 05 August 2014

    Woops, sorry for the image's big format, it wasn't my intention. Can I manipulate an image's size with html code in my comment? Should have tried it...

Leave your comment

Guest Saturday, 20 December 2014

Get Involved!

GrowthBiasBusted.org is an interactive online community where you can vote, discuss and even post stories about bias in the media. Get involved today!
Post Your Own Story

How Can I Help?

This is a donor-supported non-profit project. Your tax-deductible donation allows us to continue pushing the media to improve growth issues coverage.
Donate Now