A front-page, above-the-fold February 18 Washington Post article -- carrying the print-edition headline “Growth hasn't hit payrolls a year into the stimulus effort” -- begins by asserting that “The giant economic stimulus package enacted a year ago has helped stabilize the economy but has not made much of a dent in the nation's vast unemployment,” adding, “The Obama administration is acknowledging that its program of spending cuts and tax breaks has yet to ease joblessness.”

But that's not what the rest of the article reported.

The paragraph immediately following the one asserting that “The Obama administration is acknowledging that its program of spending cuts and tax breaks has yet to ease joblessness” quotes President Obama as saying, “You can argue, rightly, that we haven't made as much progress as we need to make when it comes to spurring job creation.” That is not an acknowledgment that the stimulus bill has “yet to ease joblessness” -- it's an admission that joblessness hasn't been eased enough, not that no progress has occurred.

This is followed a few paragraphs later by this statement: “Many economic analysts also agree with the administration's claims that the stimulus law has created or preserved 2 million jobs and that the number will total 3.5 million by the time the spending ultimately plays out.”

If “many economic analysts” agree that the stimulus" has created or preserved 2 million jobs," doesn't that completely contradict the headline's claim that “growth hasn't hit payrolls a year into the stimulus effort”?

Further, as the Economic Policy Institute has pointed out, without the stimulus bill, the unemployment rate would be 11 percent, not the 9.7 percent it was in January, which would seem to be another contradiction of the headline.

Someone at the Post seems to have noted this, albeit belatedly. The headline of the online version of the article now reads “White House crafts jobs bill, a year into stimulus effort.” That's much closer to the truth.