Associated Press
If Newsweek's goal was to spark some conversation, Niall Ferguson's new cover story is a smashing success -- it's generating far more interest than the magazine's pieces usually do.
If, however, Newsweek's goal is to strengthen its reputation, and gain new respect as a major news outlet, Ferguson's new cover story marks an ignominious low for the once-great magazine, tarnishing the publication's reputation in ways likely to do lasting, irreparable harm.
The broader point of the piece is pretty straightforward: Ferguson disapproves of President Obama and wants him to lose. That, in and of itself, would make this rather unremarkable, and hardly worth making a fuss over.
The problem, however, is that in the course of launching his lengthy, 3,300-word attack, Ferguson publishes a series of claims with no foundation in reality. I'm not talking about errors of judgment, I'm referring to transparent errors of fact -- Ferguson wrote easily-checkable claims about health care, the stimulus, China, job creation, Paul Ryan, and taxes, all of which completely fall apart after minimal scrutiny.
Remember, this isn't some randomly-published piece of commentary, featured on an obscure conservative website; this is the cover story of Newsweek -- which ostensibly has editors.
I've seen several detailed fact-checking pieces published over the last couple of days, and I don't intend to reinvent the wheel. Matthew O'Brien, James Fallows, and Noah Smith have all published worthwhile takedowns, and they're worth your time.
But there's one problem in particular that helps capture why Ferguson's piece represents political journalism at its most atrocious.
Ferguson argues that President Obama promised the Affordable Care Act wouldn't add to the deficit. In reality, this is a promise Obama has kept, but Ferguson cites CBO and Joint Committee on Taxation reports showing that extending coverage and benefits "will have a net cost of close to $1.2 trillion over the 2012–22 period."
If you're thinking, "Oh god, I know where this is going," keep reading because it's worse than you think.
Paul Krugman explained the problem with Ferguson's half-cocked nonsense.
Readers are no doubt meant to interpret this as saying that CBO found that the Act will increase the deficit. But anyone who actually read, or even skimmed, the CBO report knows that it found that the ACA would reduce, not increase, the deficit -- because the insurance subsidies were fully paid for.
Now, people on the right like to argue that the CBO was wrong. But that's not the argument Ferguson is making -- he is deliberately misleading readers, conveying the impression that the CBO had actually rejected Obama's claim that health reform is deficit-neutral, when in fact the opposite is true.
More than that: by its very nature, health reform that expands coverage requires that lower-income families receive subsidies to make coverage affordable. So of course reform comes with a positive number for subsidies -- finding that this number is indeed positive says nothing at all about the impact on the deficit unless you ask whether and how the subsidies are paid for. Ferguson has to know this (unless he's completely ignorant about the whole subject, which I guess has to be considered as a possibility). But he goes for the cheap shot anyway.
In order to publish this lie, Ferguson counted up the costs, ignored the savings and receipts, and presented a bogus net total. It's like saying the Patriots won the Super Bowl because they scored 14 points. But didn't the Giants score 17 points? No, no, that doesn't matter. The only thing that counts is that the Patriots scored 14 points. If you ignore one side of the scoreboard, the argument makes perfect sense.
Making matters much, much worse, Ferguson decided to challenge Krugman's facts with an angry response, pointing to a CBO report that he's certain proves him right.
It doesn't. As Dylan Byers explained, "[I]n order to get himself out of that predicament, Ferguson decides to edit the CBO report to satisfy his own conclusions.... Ferguson cut the CBO excerpt off mid-sentence and changed the meaning entirely.... So, one more time: The Oxford-trained, Harvard-employed, Newsweek contibutor Niall Ferguson just edited the CBO report to change its meaning."
What Ferguson and Newsweek published isn't journalism; it's a joke.
Leave a Comment:
You're too polite. The piece is complete tripe. Utterly dishonest and factually crippled. It has no place anywhere other than a Fox program.
I will agree the piece is misleading since it only discusses the cost of insurance. But, the other fact of the CBO report being left out says the number of uninsured will still be high:
http://www.cbo.gov/publication/43472
Why are the Projected Medicaid and CHIP Savings Stemming from the Supreme Court’s Decision Greater than the Projected Additional Costs of Subsidies Provided through the Exchanges?
Federal spending over the 2012–2022 period for Medicaid and CHIP is now projected to be $289 billion less than previously expected, whereas the estimated costs of tax credits and other subsidies for the purchase of health insurance through the exchanges (and related spending) have risen by $210 billion. Small changes in other components of the budget estimates account for the remaining $5 billion of the difference.
The key factors leading to that result are as follows:
Despite much hype, the act did not accomplish what it sought. I read there will still be 6 million uninsured.
So, fromny, I take it that you agree with me that we should still be working toward the universal coverage of single-payer? Excellent!
;-)
Vulture/Voucher 2012
Proving Two Rights DO Make a Wrong!
Ferguson is a fu king liar and he needs to called a fu king liar. He knows he's a fu king liar. Don't believe me. He is all the fact-checking you need:
A Full Fact-Check of Niall Ferguson's Very Bad Argument Against Obama - Matthew O'Brien - The Atlantic
Niall Ferguson's Obama story, fact-checked - POLITICO.com
As a Harvard Alum, I Apologize - James Fallows - The Atlantic
Unethical Commentary, Newsweek Edition
Niall Ferguson is wrong about Obama’s foreign policy, too | New York Daily News
Niall Ferguson's Embarrassing Response To Paul Krugman - Business Insider
Twitter / nycsouthpaw: @TheStalwart he truncated a ...
Fisking Ferguson I - The Dish | By Andrew Sullivan - The Daily Beast
Niall Ferguson's Absurd Critique of Obama in One Chart
Brad DeLong: More Lies from Niall Ferguson: Fire-His-Ass-Now Department Noah Smith
Could it be any clearer why we don't have a more responsible media and press? It's all turned to be the National Enquirer of a generation ago. Given the financial problems of press and media organizations, it is all to titillate, not inform, not to present an accurate depiction of the body politic.
It just disgusts more and more.
It's more than a joke, it's unethical and they should sack him.
'Sack' as in the British sense, or the American football sense? I'm cool with either, although there would be a bit more satisfaction in the latter.
You are supposed to just agree with him because he is a writer for a well published,long lasting magazine of ill repute.
As we see on occasions like this, journalists at times get egotistical and think they can pull off a regime change because ..."the pen is mightier than the sword"! Of course any sword or pen wielded by a fool is as deadly as a sword made of wet noodles.
Yet there are those who do not care at all about the facts or truth.These "lemmings" as they are called only care about having their own delusions fed.
Journalism has been dying a slow death since the 1970's when TV networks decided that news is just part of its entertainment and newspaper readership declined which continues.
Ahhh Steve, this is the "yellow-journalism" propaganda that is so now preferred by the reich......
I was a Newsweek subscriber for 20 years. I noticed the slide a few years ago and cut them loose. Got a "deal" to re-subscribe the other and tore it up. I have no use for Foxweek.
I know what you mean. When they let Karl Rove pen commentary, that was the last straw.
Was it when they started to go bankrupt and gave it over to Tina Brown and her Daily Beast?
I read Newsweek and have for about 35 yrs. I have never been so offended by a contributing writer of that magazine. I am a dyed-in-the-wool liberal and I read articles by Milton Friedmann and always enjoyed George Will. Will is still the only conservative writer/speaker (I watch him on Sunday TV) that makes me stop and seriously consider his arguments.
Mr. Ferguson is as rabid as any of the typical right wing/conservative today. As is pointed out in this article, he is willing to cut, clip, and paste to make [up] his point. I sincerely hope that Newsweek sees the error of their ways and rid themselves of Niall Ferguson!
Like Andrea Mitchel did with Romney tape?
http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2012/06/msnbc-misportrays-romneys-wawa-remarks-126545.html
Ah, yes, Romney's friends at Politico, hard at work again.
What a typical rightwingnut response! Eric, you do add hilarity whenever you post!!!
Always nice to have a pathetically-ignorant little wingnut troll come along and demonstrate for us exactly how stupid stupid has to be to be stupid enough to be a wingnut. Do you have a neocortex, Etic (big non-Republican word Republicans can't understand, so suvbstitute "frontal lobes")? Do you actually have opposable thumbs?
Great to get all the response without any substance. All that is left is attacks, very sad and pathetic. Only disappointed that no one said "turn off Fox!". No one can argue the fact of what happened can you?
If you'd brought facts, instead of a twisted opinion piece, you might have something there. As it is, it's not our job to prove a negative, especially when all you have is one biased source.
*sigh* here's another:
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865557720/MSNBC-twists-truth-to-invent-Romney-gaffe.html?pg=all
A Utah (thus Mormon, thus favoring Romney) source, truly you find some winners!
Anyone with a NEWSWEEK subscription should cancel it like I cancelled TIME magazine because on the anniversary of 911 they put only TWO blue beams into the sky on the cover and in the story...there were THREE ...yes 3... FRACKING DAMNIT ...three buildings in New York City that fell on September 11, 2001,. And all...yes ALL THREE ( 3 - 3 -3 ) buildings fell at what NIST finally acknowledges as "Free-Fall Acceleration" but still won't TEST any of the remaining 911 samples....yes there STILL ARE remains of that day that COULD be tested and have been...the USGS has finally verified that NANO-THERMITE a Military Grade Highly difficult to make EXPLOSIVE was found in ALL samples tested. Building # 7 also fell that afternoon...20 minutes AFTER BBS reported it had collapsed already? Were the BBS people physic ??
So I canceled my Time subscription and consider Time, its newspaper included, a "tainted" source for the 1% 'ers.
btw...there were bldgs 3,4,5 (a 22 story hotel with only top two floors damaged) and building 6 that ALSO did NOT collapse in New York that day....despite more damagae than the three (3) that did collapse.
Bob...;/
Could you take your tinfoil hat and move on? Thanks.
Not in same 'camp'...but he's STILL raining drones on civilians in a variety of countries...he sent the CIA into Turkey BEFORE this "uprising" in Syria began for that EXACT purpose...regime change in Syria...he ended the Iraq war..ONLY because Al.Maliqui(sp?) would NOT continue with agreement that would bar US troops from Iraqi law...otherwise...there would STILL be US troops in Iraq. He promised a "single payer option" yet caved to the 1% drug companies, he's invading State Okayed Medical Cannabis Clinics, the US has 17,000 US patents for medical cannabis uses yet won't declassify it as Schedule 1 drug, and still arrests a disparity of African American and Hispanics for cannabis...something the Declaration of Independence is WRITTEN on for COUNTRY's SAKE! Our forefathers GREW it as a crop and and in WWII there was "Hemp For Victory" put out by Pentagon back then. Our FIRST LAWS in American colonies was you HAD to grow cannabis for the hemp for manufacturing...makes better fuels, rope, cloth, paper, wood, insulation...even cars as Henry Ford showed with an all HEMP car he made.
And Sibel Edmonds story remains HIDDEN by his decree, and so many other "secrets". he's classifiying documents faster and more than Bush-Cheney EVER did..what is he hiding?
Devil he is....but as I said..he's the less evil one for the most of us 99%'ers.
Bob
Bob, I've actually read the NIST report, and it doesn't support your conspiracy imagination world one bit. You can believe whatever you want, but please don't confuse your beliefs with facts.
Kindly go fall in a nice deep hole you pathetic fool.
Maybe Ferguson is trying to fill the gap Brietbart left behind (shudder) -- i.e., facts that don't support his argument may be disregarded as left-wing bias.
I have a sinking feeling that little Jimmy O'Keefe can't be far away.
I never really paid much attention to Niall Ferguson until I caught his Civilization: The West and the Rest on PBS. Even with my puny little minor in history, I came to the conclusion that his thesis was a load of hogwash within 20 minutes. I usually give PBS programs the benefit of the doubt, but this program drove me mad and had me shouting at the TV. It was a chore to fast forward through the program to see if it improved or not. It didn't.
I had to find out who came up this smelly pile of garbage. Much to my surprise the guy did have a degree in history and taught at Harvard. It only served to lower my opinion of Harvard History professors.
Since then, I've operated on the "he's lying" before I trust anything he writes/says.
Niall Ferguson has been known for YEARS for his yellow journalism and "counterfactual" histories. Why Newsweek would ever even let him write for them shows how desperate that magazine has become!!!
Dead on. Ferguson made his mark as a proponent of counterfactual history, a sketchy subdiscipline of history. He is used to manufacturing his own stories, regardless of the evidence available. In essence, he's famous for making stuff up.
Did you reead his article about how dismal the Olympics were for BG? It was pathetic.
I bet this dumb ass cheated the whole way through school and is essentially a fraud, in terms of his education and skill.
He's a fraud at what he does -- economic historian:
Niall Ferguson Has Been Wrong On Economics - Business Insider
The author should be banned from publishing anything further for the magazine and Newsweek should do an entire magazine next week - cover and all - apologizing - the Mea Culpa issue.
I haven't read Newsweek in at least 15 years. Seems like I haven't missed much.
About the only way the magazine can recover even part of its lost credibility is to publish a "Why Obama Must Stay" (or "Why Romney Must Be Defeated") story that corrects the factual errors in the Ferguson piece and serves to balance his viewpoint.
Niall Ferguson is nothing more than your standard issue Tory Twit. A good example of why we gave his useless ancestors the boot. As we should boot him back to ToryTwitLand.
I would sure hate to be one of his students waiting for him to judge... I mean grade one of my papers. This ethical breach of conduct has to draw into question his ability to effectively and unbiasedly conduct a classroom. I wonder what grade Neill's cover story would get if it were submitted to a professor for a grade. F? Dismissal?
So why is this guy still employed by the magazine? Other writers that are scruples challenged, have resigned, Zakariah etc., why is NW hanging onto him? Is it that NW is the Politico of print (see right wing web blog, shoe horned into legitimacy by the '08 contest) masquerading as unbiased?
When Howard Fineman and Jonathan Alter left Newsweek, I thought it was sad that such notable journalists had to leave a publication with the long history of Newsweek. Upon reflection, however, it seems to me that the ownership of this magazine by the famed Washington Post had finally come full circle and demonstrated that the WAPO is no longer one of the great bastions of fair journalism. For anyone on the right to say that WAPO and its spawn, Newsweek, is part of the left-leaning MSM is a joke. Aside from the Watergate scoop 40 years ago, the WAPO isn't that far removed in its political leaning than its neighbor, the Washington Times. Except for cleaning up a little better, the WAPO is not the Fox News of print, but it sure isn't in the same class as the New York Times.
Fineman at Huffpost and Alter at Bloomberg are what excellence in journalism can still mean. These guys got out when the getting was good.
Re: Niall Ferguson
Ever wonder what happens to the paid trolls that can't make it on MSNBC blogs?
Read Mark Twain's short story - My Watch - and up date it.
Thank you. That's another free cab ride you've got coming... This is one from the Old Maestro I hadn't seen..
I did mention that "nice coincidence" about the initials of my moniker, didn't I?
I shudder to think that Ferguson is a Scotsman... Must be something in that Bay State water; Grandpa was claiming the same heritage...
Looks to me like the GOP plan to start really swift-boating Obama right about now got caught out by Obama's early, relentless and powerful critiques of Romney and now Ryan.
They'd convinced themselves he was a wimp, a pushover, a 'lightweight' as Dick Cheney called him.
So when they put up their own, real, empty suit, they expected to breeze through doing to Obama what they did to John Kerry.
Didn't work this time. Niall Ferguson is incredibly reactionary (he goes around writing how the world was better off under the British Empire, for pete's sake!) and imagines this as a companion piece to the piece of crap film they are about to release on Obama using the theses of Di'Nesh De Sousa.
I hope Newsweek fired him already.
Just another day for this guy at the Bull@!$%# factory! It's all very common!
Has anyone noticed that his bar graph on how much the President said he would reduce the deficit is showing that the deficit is actually falling? That's not your average conservative talking point! Love that graph!
Of course Newsweek has been untrustworthy for some time. But MSNBC is hardly better, as it televised the criminal controlled demolition of the twin towers under evacuation and had the nerve of attributing it to the impact of large aircraft.
Love,
Cancelled my subscription to Newsweek years ago. It was too "some say the world is flat" for me and I hated the scribblings of that smug dinosaur with the petrified brain, George Will.