5 ms·
I hate the framing of the headline making it sound like a negative. "Crush" is surely a negative.
by jonny_eh 4y ago
I hate the framing of the headline making it sound like a negative. "Crush" is surely a negative.
- DiggyJohnson 4y agoI wouldn’t worry about the connotation of a headline like this too much: hate isn’t good for you. Just understand the information it conveys and move on from there.
- mostlysimilar 4y agoGood advice in general, but there's additional information coded in the words chosen. It shouldn't be a surprise that the Wall Street Journal would see falling rents as a "crush" given it's readership probably leans more towards landlord than tenant.
- DiggyJohnson 4y agoYea, I do see that coded language, I just guess I’m a bit tired of picking apart language instead of discussing content. I’m not surprised at the headline for the same reason as you: “given its readership probably means more towards landlord than tenant.”
- consumer451 4y agoI would imagine that an editor chooses headlines based on their readership, would they not? My judgement may be off here, but is a WSJ reader more likely to be a landlord or a tenant?
- tomrod 4y agoGoes both ways I reckon. A lot of folks rent.
- MichaelZuo 4y agoIt's a bit surprising for the WSJ to include obviously clickbait words in their headlines.
- paxys 4y agoDefinitely landlord. WSJ has also been pushing the "no one wants to work anymore", "quiet quitting", "WFH workers are unproductive/cheating" etc. narrative pretty hard. They (and their readership) have been center-right for a long time now.
- bin_bash 4y agoI bet the paying ones are landlords. WSJ costs hundreds per year and they're stingy with discounts. Apple News is one way to get it cheap, but you've gotta use that reader.
- autoexec 4y agoI just wait for the good articles to show up on HN and hit the archive link. No wonder they aren't tailoring headlines to my interests.
- Vt71fcAqt7 4y agoLots of wall street people rent. Renting is actually a good experience if you're rich and nothing is for sale in Manhattan anyway so there's not much of a choice.
- bin_bash 4y agoI think Barron's is probably more targeted to people that actually work on Wall Street. I suspect Manhattan finance people make up <1% of the people that subscribe to WSJ.
- em500 4y agoYup. The main attraction of buying/owning vs renting is reduction of risk/uncertainty. If you're rich (>double-digit million net worth) and not stupid (hold your entire net worth in crypto coins), you don't have to care about uncertainly. With 10M net worth, you can get a few 10k from just interests or dividends, so you can rent something pretty nice anywhere in the world on a whim.
- goodpoint 4y agoAlso because of tax reasons I guess. But that demographic does not care very much about lowering rents.
- HarryHirsch 4y agoDon't worry, the audience of the Wall Street Journal hates it as well. Whoever is renting loves it, though.
- atourgates 4y agoThe other crazy part of the framing is that while sure, apartment rents are down slightly from all-time highs, they're still up over 20% in just two years. Even as someone with a decent amount of my net-worth wrapped up in real-estate, a real-estate crash can't come soon enough. Housing ourselves is eating far too much of the average person's budget, and I hope this small dip in rents is a harbinger of much bigger drops to come.
- bruceb 4y agoclicks don't come from accurate descriptions.
- antisthenes 4y agoIt's exactly what they want. They got you to react to their crappy headline.
- xnx 4y agoOf all the low-effort ChatGPT grifts, I'd love to see one that de-sensationalized headlines. A headline should be the shortest possible summary of the rest of the article.
- sokoloff 4y ago“Housing rents continue to obey supply and demand” isn’t that interesting.
- dang 4y agoOk, we've uncrushed the market in the title above.