Revisions which were regular standard practice. About ~50% of the revisions made the previous administration look good, and about 50% made them look bad.

▲

itsoktocry a day ago | parent [-]

You are only half reading the news.

Yes, revisions are valid and happen. Yes, a look at historical revisions don't show any bias.

But where are you seeing that half made Trump look good?

https://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cesnaicsrev.htm

▲

axus a day ago | parent | next [-]

Biden was the previous administration.

▲

teemur a day ago | parent | prev [-]

The whole of trumps first stint?

For this year's numbers there are two possible stories that come to my mind:

1. The jobs are going ~constantly downhill and any new, revised number is going to be worse than previous

2. There is a conspiracy and initially the numbers are systematically inflated and/or afterwards deflated because reasons... that are completely incomprehensible to me. I don't even understand if this conspiracy theory should be pro or against trump.

	▲	itsoktocry 14 hours ago \| parent [-]
		>The whole of trumps first stint? Is it hard to imagine a world where things from 10 years ago aren't the same as today? Can you not see that politicians will do anything to win? Biggest downward revision ever recorded this morning, by the way.