US economy

Keep it simple for journalists, BoE staff conclude



© Reuters. FILE PHOTO: A person walks past the Bank of England in London, Britain, October 22, 2021. REUTERS/Tom Nicholson

By David Milliken

LONDON (Reuters) – Writing about the Bank of England may be more an art than a science, but that hasn’t stopped two of the central bank’s more enterprising researchers from corralling financial journalists into their economic models.

In a paper published on Friday that aims to improve the central bank’s communication with the public, the researchers start with a bold assumption about journalists’ work ethic.

“The journalist faces a trade-off,” the paper states. “Writing news that satisfies consumer desires will sell more papers, but requires effort. Paraphrasing the central bank may not align with consumer desires, but is costless.”

Several pages of advanced mathematics later – and after exerting the power of computational linguistics on thousands of British newspaper articles since the late 1990s – the paper concludes that it is best to “keep things simple”.

Short sentences and stating the main point at the start of a speech maximise the chance of a reporter reiterating the BoE’s message verbatim.

The research is based on articles about the BoE published by five newspapers that account for just under half of British print circulation – The Sun, the Daily Mirror, the Daily Mail, The Times and The Guardian.

The Financial Times and its free competitor City A.M. – which are aimed at financially savvy readers – are excluded as the authors decided “they do not transmit news to the general public in the way that we are concerned with here”.

News organisations such as Reuters also fail to make the grade, though the authors do consider – then dismiss – the possibility that newspaper journalists “are simply copying from newswire services”.

“Controlling what is put out on newswires is an intermediate step that the central bank may also want to optimise, but it is not what the public reads,” the paper concludes.

Like most BoE research, the paper represents the views of the authors, not a formal position of the central bank.

The authors are James Brookes, a BoE researcher who has also analysed BoE regulators’ letters to banks, and Tim Munday, a PhD student at the University of Oxford who previously worked at Goldman Sachs (NYSE:) for the BoE’s new chief economist, Huw Pill.

(This story corrects word in quote in paragraph 8)

Disclaimer: Fusion Media would like to remind you that the data contained in this website is not necessarily real-time nor accurate. All CFDs (stocks, indexes, futures) and Forex prices are not provided by exchanges but rather by market makers, and so prices may not be accurate and may differ from the actual market price, meaning prices are indicative and not appropriate for trading purposes. Therefore Fusion Media doesn`t bear any responsibility for any trading losses you might incur as a result of using this data.

Fusion Media or anyone involved with Fusion Media will not accept any liability for loss or damage as a result of reliance on the information including data, quotes, charts and buy/sell signals contained within this website. Please be fully informed regarding the risks and costs associated with trading the financial markets, it is one of the riskiest investment forms possible.





READ SOURCE

Leave a Reply

This website uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you accept our use of cookies.