Anyone trying to sell a home — or who makes a living from home sales –likely has been approaching the Sentinel on the lawn lately much as one would a rattlesnake.
For anyone in that situation, the headlines have been toxic:
“Sales of existing homes plunge”.
” ‘Scary’ housing market tumbles”.
“Homes outlook worsens”.
Back in April and May, there seemed to be reason for concern — home values nationwide were falling — but also optimism: In metropolitan Orlando, they were rising.
Foreclosure-related legal filings were increasing nationally at a torrid pace, with Florida second in the nation behind only California for the topspot in that dubious competition.
The median price in the Orlando area continued to rise, though, despite a 50 percent year-to-year drop in sales.
Then, like a water skier’s suddenly tightening tow rope, the market yanked local prices into line with slumping sales.
One reader, commenting on an article about condo-hotel problems, asked, “Have you ever stopped and wondered what effect you might have on people because of your articles? In this case Realtors who are trying to make a living?
” . . . Every time your paper writes anything about Real Estate or any other subject,” he continued, “most people who read it believe it,” implying that they shouldn’t.
Others, too, decried the “doom and gloom” in the news media about a falling market, offering anecdotal evidence to the contrary or suggesting that the situation be measured with yardsticks different from the ones that drew no complaint when the market was rising.
Is it true that news reports of ailing economies or failing finances become self-fulfilling prophecies? Do readers who see such articles retreat from the market, thereby contributing to the problem?
News reporters, after all, are supposed to sit on the sidelines, observing and recounting what they see so readers can use that information to their benefit. Is it possible for journalists to do that without affecting the situation — in effect, becoming part of the subject they observe?
Probably not.
When the Sentinel reports about a proposed tax increase and residents turn out to oppose it, the newspaper has served as a catalyst. That can hurt those who would benefit from the increase — not to mention the politicians who proposed it. On the other hand, it can benefit those who don’t want to pay — or can’t afford — the increase.
Similarly, if reports of falling sales and prices hurt home sellers — and developers, construction workers, materials suppliers, Realtors — they also can help those looking for bargains, people who might otherwise not be able to afford the homes they want or need.
Is it the newspaper’s role to decide which side of that equation to benefit?
No. The newspaper’s role is to report the news, not to suppress or distort it.
The information that provides to readers may well change some minds, but it’s not up to the Sentinel to pick winners and losers. Trying to do so surely would come back to bite it — and them.
