With
 a fragile economy during a heated election cycle, the news media should
 be focused on economic data. But when it comes to the growth of the 
U.S. economy as measured by gross domestic product (GDP), the three 
broadcasts networks were silent.
ABC,
 CBS and NBC news programs ignored the falling GDP numbers for six 
straight months from Jan. 28 to July 26, 2012, according to Nexis 
transcripts. In 2012, the only coverage on the morning and evenings 
shows was three stories on Jan. 27, and two more about the “dismal” 
report on July 27, 2012. But for the six months in between, the network 
new programs had nothing to say about the economic growth rate even 
though it was falling.
In
 prior years, including 2009-2011, the networks didn’t hide from 
reporting and spinning the gross domestic product announcements. In July
 2009, Katie Couric called a -1 percent GDP estimate “the latest evidence the recession is easing” the same night ABC anchor Elizabeth Vargas found “new optimism about an economic recovery.” Two years later, in July 2011, an anemic 1.3 percent GDP rate was used to justify a debt ceiling deal.
According
 to the Commerce Department, GDP is “The market value of goods and 
services produced by labor and property in the United States regardless 
of nationality.” Investopedia said it is “one of the primary indicators used to gauge the health of a country’s economy.”
That
 importance hasn’t translated into much news coverage. In fact, one of 
the three networks ignored the important GDP announcement July 27 that 
showed the economy continued to slow -- to a very weak 1.5 percent in 
the second quarter. That night CBS “Evening News” reported that “The 
U.S. economy slows sharply, raising the risk of a new recession.” NBC 
also aired a report that evening about the weak data, but ABC ignored the story
 -- preferring to tout a "giant rally on Wall Street," cover Michelle Obama’s 
“Let’s Move” campaign in London, and mention a study that proved the 
“five-second rule” is wrong instead.
According to The Associated Press, the news “adds to worries that the economy could be stalling three years after the recession ended.”
 Gene Epstein’s wrote in Barron’s that the past three years’ economic 
growth averaged “just 2.2%, anemic by any measure.” He then put that 
slow growth into disconcerting historic context on July 30 saying, 
“Reach back to 1950, and examine all periods that exclude recessions, 
and you’ll find there has never been a three-year interval that ran as 
low as 2.2% [average].”
And even Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner testified to Congress July 25 saying, “The economy is not growing fast enough,” and that was before the latest disappointing report.
With
 such bad economic news coming during a heated race for the White House,
 it is odd for the networks to be so quiet. After all, they repeatedly 
bashed President Ronald Reagan and President George W. Bush
 with the economies they presided over. But as the Business and Media 
Institute has reported, during Obama’s tenure the networks have either ignored, downplayed or spun bad economic news.
The
 disappointing second quarter rate was not unexpected by economists or 
other news outlets, although it might have been a surprise to people 
relying on the network news to cover gross domestic product. Before the 
latest announcement, CNN Money reported that the second quarter was expected to be even lower
 than the first quarter growth of 1.9 percent. CNN Money said that the 
economists they surveyed were expecting a 1.4 percent rate of growth, 
“down significantly” from the prior quarter.
“The
 outlook is very bleak from a consumer’s perspective,” Wells Fargo 
economist Sam Bullard told CNN Money. Paul Edelstein, another expert was
 cited, who said economic growth must be at a yearly rate of 3 percent 
or more to lower the unemployment rate.
Despite
 the networks’ six months of silence, some media outlets have 
acknowledged the difficulty a slow growing economy will be for the 
incumbent president come November. The Christian Science Monitor wrote 
on April 27, that “The
 US economy started the year at a less than scintillating pace, giving 
the Republicans, especially likely presidential challenger Mitt Romney, 
fodder against President Obama.” 
At
 that time, CS Monitor said: “Although the economy is in no danger of 
sinking into another recession, the slower rate of growth is now in what
 economists term the ‘gray zone’ for Mr. Obama ...If the economy grows 
at 2 percent or less, voters are antsy.”
CS
 Monitor also noted that economists had expected a growth rate of around
 2.5 percent that month, but the Commerce Department found it was a 
lower 2.2 percent rate. That quarter was revised further down to 1.9 
percent the next month (and then back up to 2 percent on July 27).
The
 New York Times is also aware of the political ramifications of the 
dismal economic growth. A headline on The New York Times FiveThirtyEight
 blog read: “July 17: Obama’s Re-election Chances Fall on Gloomy G.D.P. 
Forecast.” That post warned that the economy is expected to remain 
sluggish: “Economists now expect the below-average growth that the 
economy has been experiencing to continue for quite a while, with G.D.P.
 growing at a rate of about 2 percent into early 2013. The panel’s 
previous projections had not been especially bullish, but had been 
closer to 2.5 percent.”
Of
 course, the economy would be a major problem for Obama, if the media 
were covering it instead of covering for it. While the networks have 
shielded the president by ignoring GDP altogether between Jan. 28,  and 
July 26, other outlets have downplayed the bad news or found a silver 
lining.
On
 April 27, it took The Washington Post 16 paragraphs to mention that the
 2.2 percent growth rate “fell below expectations.” The same day, the 
Posts’ WonkBlog told people on April 27 “don’t get too worked up”
 about the disappointing estimates of 2.2 percent growth in the first 
quarter of 2012 because it was only an initial estimate (with two 
revisions to follow). That same WonkBlog post claimed it was not “an 
attempt to spin away bad news for President Obama’s re-election bid. But
 it’s not.” The rate was later revised down to 1.9 percent, before being
 finalized at 2 percent.
According to the Jan. 27 Times, “Last year was the slowest growth in a nonrecessionary year since 1947, economists at Credit Suisse said.” They were talking about 2011, and 2012 is looking like it will be even slower. 
But
 back in October the Times found it “encouraging” that GDP had grown at a
 2.5 percent rate between July and September 2011. Why? Because, they 
claimed it was a “sign that the recovery, while painfully slow, had not stalled.”
Methodology
The Business and Media Institute searched Nexis transcripts of ABC, CBS and NBC for mentions of GDP or gross domestic product on "The Early Show, "Today," "Good Morning America" and "Nightly News," "Evening News," and "World News" in 2012. Three unrelated stories mentioning GDP were excluding: one story that mentioned China's GDP, one mentioned how much a space starup company could add to global GDP and one included an interview referring to the nation's debt to GDP ratio.