Toronto Star - Getting Better Analysis of Homes/Condos

[West End Boy]

My pet peeve of the moment is the Saturday Toronto Star's "New in Homes & Condos" section. Most articles are straight out of the developer's press releases with almost no critique or analysis offered. The two regular columns which are meant to provide a more critical eye, Condo Critic and Best-Laid Plans, do not focus on projects currently for sale. Obviously the whole set-up is a cash cow for TorStar and they don't have much incentive to be upsetting the development industry by pointing out the negatives of any particular development.

The problem for me is that the quality of these developments has the potential for much improvement, if only there was the motivation. The Star has shown time and again that when they decide to go after someone or pursue a particular agenda, they often have an incredibly powerful effect. The fact that they pursue a progressive social agenda is one reason why I prefer them to the Globe and Mail. I believe that if the Star made changes to this section, it could provide pressure and incentive for developers to produce better quality developments, which would result in better built form, better public spaces, etc.

So my question is, how can we get them to start actually "reporting" on the new home and condo developments in the GTA, including discussions of the pros AND the cons. I've written a couple of letters to the section editor, but I don't think that's going to have much impact. I'm looking for ways to help shape a more positive and progressive built environment by raising the bar on how development is reported on. Any ideas?

 

[ponyboy]

I think it bothers a lot of us. You have to read the alternative press to get independent critical analysis of real estate and development. Sometimes the best stuff is done by bloggers. The RE section of the major newspapers is simply an extension of the marketing of developers, banks, and other RE industry people because they pay the ad bills (there may be a token negative story here and there). If we really looked carefully at all of the conflicts of interest in our society, we would think twice about what a lot of people say. Housing, and the consumer confidence upon which it rests, is so big to the economy that the vested players won't do anything to upset the profit machine. Compensation, hence outlook, are terribly shortsighted, and our government is unwilling to regulate the incentives to encourage long-term outlook (they are also shortsighted, looking only to the next election and necessary fundraising). Unfortunately, persistent distortions due to conflict of interest exacerbates the bubble conditions, leaving unnecessary loss when it eventually pops. But people who are compensated by booked transactions and exercised stock options already have theirs in the wake of the mess.