Thread by @ClaraJeffery

Which is more unreliable: exit polls or preliminary jobs reports.

So many narratives launched…so many times new data comes in that radically modifies or even reverses the findings, but no matter, the narrative has cemented.

People who really know this stuff know how deeply flawed these mechanisms are, but we keep on structuring reporting and major decisions on it.

At least we have a medium simmer debate about exit/all polls, but no even “grain of salt” provisos are attached to most accounts of jobs reports, just breathlessly announced, with instant confident analysis about what it means….

And when they are wildly off, as they have often been in recent years—and maybe always? Who can say, since it goes undiscussed—very few people hear about the revised reports, and what it “means,” or augurs for accuracy of reports themselves.

And the most pernicious purveyors of jobs reports without caveats are our most sober news organizations—the major papers, NPR. (Cable news then runs wild.)

And all this is true whether the reports are “good” or “bad.”

“the numbers can have unexpected swings from month to month, with some predictions way off target for many months in a row.”

Something we should be told at top of every report, but aren’t. investopedia.com/articles/04/09…

The jobs "report"—and I think this word choice is misleading—is really a mash-up of two polls. Or survey, if you like, each with their own inherent blind spots.

Could we build a more reliable jobs report? Maybe, I leave that to the statisticians and economists to debate. What *journalists* should do is be more measured in the framing of the reports, and maybe start each new account by owning up to how accurate the last 1-6 have been.

Further, may I suggest the reason WHY such caveats are not issued is that traditionally, and still far too much, business reporting and its audience have been dominated by men. And there's a great (and unacknowledged) cultural pressure to be definitive.

And, as long as I'm stirring the shit, the exact same dynamic applies to polling, reporting on polling, and broader horse-race reporting, and even the most prolific/famous critics of said polls.

AND can I just add that the "better/worse than expected"...those expectations are set by yet another poll!

Re this report, here's the chief economist of Moody's with some big caveats.

https://twitter.com/Markzandi/status/1466767163407089670