Consumer confidence surprisingly strong (?)(Reuters)

:mad:(Here's a fact that I didn't know, and the New York Times readers will NOT learn tomorrow either, that the "Conference Board" is a "private business research group!" A little FACT that the New York Times EDITED OUT of this Reuters story in tomorrows edition! Yet they still put the Reuters name on the article. Isn't that illegal? If nothing else, I think it's un-ethical. I'll include the NY Times link below, the parts the NY Times edited out are in Italics )

Consumer confidence surprisingly strong

Tue Aug 30, 2005 04:39 PM ET

By Nick Olivari

NEW YORK (Reuters) - U.S. consumer confidence unexpectedly strengthened in August as an improving job market outweighed rising gasoline prices, the Conference Board said on Tuesday.

The private business research group said its consumer confidence index rose in August to 105.6 from a revised 103.6 in July. Analysts had predicted a decline to a 101.5 reading.

The survey was conducted prior to oil climbing over $70 per barrel due to production shutdowns and refinery disruptions in the Gulf of Mexico in the wake of Hurricane Katrina.

A separate report from the Commerce Department said new orders received by U.S. factories in July dropped the most since April 2004, though the decline was not as dramatic as expected. Demand for a wide array of long-lasting manufactured goods plunged.

<http://go.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=businessNews&storyID=9513264&src=rss/businessNews>
(more at link above)

(New York Times Edited Version)

Consumer Confidence Rises Unexpectedly

By REUTERS
Published: August 31, 2005

Consumer confidence unexpectedly strengthened in August, the Conference Board reported yesterday, citing an improving job market .

It said that its consumer confidence index rose in August to 105.6, from a revised 103.6 in July. Analysts had predicted a decline to 101.5.

In a separate report, the Commerce Department said that new orders at American factories in July suffered the largest drop since April 2004, though the decline was still not as sharp as had been expected. The demand for durable manufactured goods plunged.

Meanwhile, in commodities trading, crude oil rose $2.61 a barrel yesterday, to $69.81, as oil and oil service companies assessed the damage that Hurricane Katrina had wrought on the Gulf Coast. Gasoline and natural gas futures also rose.

<http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/31/business/31factory.html?ex=1283140800&en=6edf2e3f9e0bafce&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss>
(more at link above)

NYT is taking the word of a private think-tank and reporting it as authoritative.

Hey these numbers don't suck as much as we expected! Now to REALLY lower the bar...

:shrug:

we say this is a bunch of Bullshit.

and have been doing this for years...

I think the NYT just didn't include that because they expect their readers to know that...

The University of Michigan also puts out a consumer confidence level as does money magazine.....

show an unexpected decrease in consumer confidence?

But over the long run, they show a pretty good correlation

Is there a fault you find in their methodology?

Something of that nature?

If the Conference Board said consumer confidence plummeted would you be so upset if the NYT did the same thing?

...of this Reuters wire story, and the way they are trying to sugar coat the true nature of what was originally written. If you try to read these two articles side by side, you would see the Times went though and Cherri Picked out only the "good" sounding info.

Do you NOT see a problem with that?

If I was at Reuters, I would demand they withdraw the article as edited.

This is just further evidence of how little we should trust the NY Times now.

As for "the Conference Board," do the words "conflict of interest" mean anything to you? This article has the stink of Enron and/or Arther Anderson to it.

It would be like using the Cato Institute (but not telling us what the CATO Institute is) as a source for an article that says, "Americans think fewer Taxes are a good."

consumer confidence numbers each month.

These numbers are important to investors, and they are the target audience, per se, of this type of information.

Read about the Conference Board here:
http://www.conference-board.org/aboutus/about.cfm

Its just I've never seen a group like this demonized and I'm rather shocked. There is no "conflict of interest" this is what they exist to do.

And newspapers regularly edit wire stories from the AP or Reuters.

I predict the biggest drop in history.

people will need to rebuild homes, rent hotel rooms, and so on.

In addition to the masses buying the new Ashlee Simpson CD too, of course.

They are desparate to prop up the stock market.