Worth noting, if you don’t follow this type of news closely, that The Economist publishes a piece saying a recession either is or isn’t happening every few weeks.
If you actually read those articles you'll tend to find they don't actually say "a recession is (or isn't) happening". They actually say "These specific factors indicate a likelihood of a recession (or not) in this particular area based on the following assumptions".
Publications know that most people just read headlines, walking the headlines back in the article is disingenuous.
(Note this is usually not the writers fault, headlines are chosen by editors to maximize engagement)
It's "boy cried wolf", otherwise.
Every day the boy would cry wolf and eventually the towns people stopped believing him. Then a wolf came and the boy had already lost his credibility so nobody believed him. Then the wolf ate all the sheep.
The first lesson is the boy’s, don’t burn trust by crying wolf.
The second lesson is the town’s. They let the boy desensitize them to wolves and now all their sheep are dead.
You are either cautious and follow responsible financial principles or you don't.
No amount of "boys crying wolf" will sway you one way or another, when 99.99999% of the time they're wrong anyway, or worse, they have a vested interest in you following along with what they're saying, and they want you do it it at this <<exact>> moment.
It would be an odd story if the lesson is "always believe people who don't tell the truth."