All I've heard for the last 6-8 months from the media is how bad this housing market is and how it's just getting worse. If it's sexy and has teeth, the media will take it and run with it. Think about it. What do you see when you turn on the boob-tube? Murder, War, What teen star is in rehab and who she made her sex tape with... I'll spare you the details. Just turn on the TV and you'll see what I mean. So I guess I'm not surprised when the media started attacking the housing market and just wouldn't let it go. Even the tone of voice when they were reporting on the slump was suggestive of a murder mystery.
So my question is, which came first? The Media with all its' doom and gloom or the market's slump? You may beleive that the media only reports on factual information... (I'm sorry, I just broke out in laughter!) or you may beleive that the media sees something potentially in the near future and goes after it with such vigor that it actually effects the very topic on which it is reporting on. If you don't beleive the media effects the topics they are "reporting on", just look at the Duke Lacross scandal. If you aren't familiar, I'll give you a small synopsis. Lacross players are accused of rape, the media gets a hold of it, it turns into the biggest thing since Tuana Braley (NYC), an over zealous DA tries to make it stick and it turns out to be completely false. The lacross players lives are forever effected, but my point is, would the DA have gone after those boys if this wasn't such a highly publicized case? Good questions.