Misleading or
confusing news stories makes for tedious reading. I’ve found an article from
Scoop titled KiwiBuy
the only answer to the housing shortage which was written as a
media release by the Salvation Army. This story falls mainly within the
confusing bracket, however, it could be argued that when confused, readers can
become lost and therefore miss the point completely.
The title makes a bold and somewhat biased statement; for starters there
are 101 things that could make buying or building a home more affordable. So to
say, ‘KiwiBuy is the only way’ is in my opinion somewhat short-sighted. Maybe the title could say, “KiwiBuy scheme
makes housing more affordable for low income bracket”.
The lead-in sentence states, “Growing homelessness, rent rises and
struggles for private investors could be on the way without serious changes to
the housing market, The Salvation Army says”. Does this mean private investors
will be struggling less? Also, what is meant by housing market?
Firstly, the KiwiBuy initiative is designed as a rent to buy scheme and
the ‘housing market’ is not what needs to change. What needs to change are
government policies to reform laws around housing, immigration, land
development, offshore investment, taxes and limitations to the numbers of homes
one person or company could own.
The article goes on to
mention its newspaper “Beyond
Renting”. Then the article calls it a report which is somewhat confusing. From
my perspective a newspaper and a report are different, so calling it what it is
and sticking to it makes sense. Furthermore, the article mentions Kiwi Build
and KiwiBuy which could lead to confusion. When introducing new concepts, explaining
their meaning helps to create shared understanding for readers.
The next paragraph talks
about ‘mum and dad; investors being the majority of investors in the housing
market over the past 30 years. Instead of saying this, how about some actual
statistics or even a graph giving an overall picture such as the one below
provided by the Bank of New Zealand. Moreover, the term ‘mum and dad’
investors is somewhat ambiguous and possibly does not paint an accurate
picture.
The next paragraph uses
statistics and talks about yields falling in Auckland and possibly reaching the
top of their cycle which sounds jargonistic. Jargon used in media releases is
frowned upon as it can make the issue incomprehensible for readers. Also, at
the end of a quote, Mr Johnson is credited without an introduction of who Mr
Johnson is. It helps to aid credibility in an article by quoting someone who
has direct knowledge or is a specialist on the topic being reported.
Introducing them into the story supports the information giving it strength.
Further down in the article
it is suggested that KiwiBuy and KiwiBuild are the two preferable methods of
alleviating the housing crisis. In this instance the name Kiwi Build has become
KiwiBuild and the story now contradicts its own headline. The final paragraph tries
to address the issue of income and becomes ambiguous by introducing the concept
of applying imagination and courage to the design of KiwiBuy so Kiwis in need
can have a KiwiBuild house.
This last paragraph could be
improved with factual data on income levels which correlate to the two housing schemes.
And the final sentence could be restructured to say, both ‘KiwiBuy and
KiwiBuild programmes require modification to ensure Kiwis are enabled to become
home owners in their own country’.
Comments
Post a Comment