Gene Epstein devotes his latest “Economic Beat” column in Barron’s to downplaying the significance of one-month changes in the official U.S. employment numbers.

Given the volatility and unreliability of the monthly employment numbers, we cannot tell whether a single month’s worth really does signal strength or weakness. Accordingly, what has kept recurring through the modest economic expansion of the past few years is what sports fans would call a series of head fakes. Intervals of “strength” in employment follow intervals of “weakness,” followed by intervals of strength, and so on—sound and fury signifying nothing.

By reporting on these head fakes as though they signal the likely direction of employment, reporters are only doing their job—a job that essentially consists of putting the maximum possible sizzle into every story. Analysts, who work for Wall Street firms or who send blogs to their paying subscribers, happily join in the fiction that every month’s morsel of data is worth a thorough mastication.

The pretense also helps them earn their keep. And since news reports on economic data are often dominated by how the markets are reacting to that information—or, recently, how the Federal Reserve’s tapering plans are likely to be affected—it is all the easier to assume that each month’s report really is worth taking seriously.

So how should we read the latest positive jobs report from the feds?

Nonfarm payroll employment was reported as rising in October by 204,000; and with upward revisions to prior months, the total gain came to 264,000. Accordingly, the six-month average through October now comes to an increase of 174,000, basically the same as the six-month average through September of 173,000. That 173,000, of course, reflects the upward revisions; based on the September report, the six-month average through September had been 163,000.

As for the unemployment rate, it was basically unchanged at 7.3%. While it printed at 7.2% in September, the tenth-of-a-percentage point rise is within the range of statistical error. Six months ago, the jobless rate was running at 7.5%-7.6%, and now it’s down to 7.2%-7.3%. So if six-month gains in employment continue to average 174,000, unemployment should continue to fall.

Of course, when you’re stuck with a six-month trend, you’re likely to be late on turning points. If October’s gains in employment were way off the charts—say, at greater than 400,000—then perhaps they really would signal new-found strength. Or perhaps not. …