The New York Times has a nice set of graphics outlining the factors in the housing market that provided the basis for the bubble and how this bubble could deflate in the months ahead. The NYT has been far better than the rest of the media in alerting the public to the dangers of the housing bubble, although its coverage was still not appropriate to the enormity of the problem.
Seriously, which is more important, whether the budget deficit is $20 billion higher or lower or an $8 trillion housing bubble? How big a deal is a trade agreement with Peru or Panama relative to a bubble that threatens to wipe out the accumulated savings of tens of millions of homeowners. The NYT was far better than almost anyone else (don't ask me about the Post), but it still did not give the housing bubble the attention that it deserved.
There's too much at stake this November for us to quit. As we navigate another presidential election year, thoughtful independent journalism is more important than ever. We're committed to bringing you the latest news on what's really happening across the country this election season, shining a light on the stories corporate media overlooks and keeping the public informed about how power really works in America.
Quality reporting doesn't come for free, and we don't have corporate backers to rely on to fund our work. Everything we do is thanks to our incredible community of readers, who chip in a few dollars at a time to make what we do possible. This month, we're trying to raise $50,000 to help fuel our election coverage, and we've fallen behind on reaching our goal. Any amount you give today will bring us closer to making our reporting possible—and a generous donor has agreed to match all online donations, so your impact will be doubled.
