I’ve been critical of local reporting of growth, especially the Seattle Times which has shown a tendency to take the easy way out when writing about new development. The Times in particular has a bad habit of reporting economic news about housing in a matter of fact way on the business pages, but when their reporters write stories about housing or growth, they tend to have a hyperbolic angle, featuring a sad story about one individual who’s circumstances have changed for the worse because of the new project.

Do real people suffer when change comes to a neighborhood or an apartment building? Yes, of course. But the job of policy makers and journalists is to understand and explain what’s actually going on. The pain of some individuals should be off set where we can, but we’re talking about 115,000 new people coming to Seattle in 20 years. How do we make room for them? How do developers work with tenants to transition them if possible? How do we create enough supply to reduce the downsides of change? What does a building purchase actually look like?

Joshua McNichols did a great job in a report on KUOW about a building purchase and change out of tenants on Capitol Hill. What makes McNichols reporting so refreshing?: It’s accurate! The developer is portrayed as a businessman trying to make a project work. The tenants and the developer have three dimensions and are not portrayed as cartoons or worse, as has been the case in the Times and other media outlets, stereotypical victims. The later is simply exploitative. Take a listen to the report, it’s worth the time.