Heroes not ogregores: WSJ coverage of Detroit Beats the Doom Loop

I had hoped that Ben Cohen’s recent WSJ story on the revitalization of Detroit would help me think about whether a city is an ogregore. Instead, as usual, it focused on people rather than institutions, and one person in particular. I imagine it’s easier to write a newspaper piece on deadline if you only have to interview a couple of people rather than digging into the subtle dynamics and complicated history of a complex system.

A couple of days earlier, Konrad Putzier had written “Reversing the Real-Estate Doom Loop Is Possible. Just Look at Detroit.” Just like Cohen’s, Putzier’s story was anchored on a personality, this time a billionaire developer, Dan Gilbert. Putzier offered some general explanations, like an abundance of empty buildings that were easy to convert to apartments, but tied it back to Gilbert’s decision to move back from the suburbs as a catalyst for other downtown real-estate projects. I’m willing to stipulate that Gilbert was a key pioneer, but urban development doesn’t just depend on what on influential person does.

Another staple of journalism is to interview an expert. In Putzier’s story, it was urban studies theorist Richard Florida. A few system-level explanations were ascribed to him, like Detroit’s reservoir of wealth; a downtown that that was already less office-dependent than many before the age of remote work because rents have been low for so long; tax breaks from the city and state; and small businesses following the lead of big developments. However, there was no sense of this system being as influential a character as the billionaire Dan Gilbert.

Ben Cohen’s reporting,  part of a “Science of Success” series, is meant to explain why things turned out well. Most of this story, though, just tried to persuade the reader that things have turned around, not explaining why—and, of course, playing up the human-interest angle of the story’s hero, the CEO of the nonprofit Visit Detroit, Claude Molinari. It’s another Hero’s Journey. Molinari is portrayed as a “driving force,” in the same way that Dan Gilbert was said to be “leading the city’s revitalization” in Konrad Putzier’s piece. Cohen’s explanation veers close to self-help platitudes: “success often requires the unwavering persistence to will even the most improbable outcomes into existence.” While Cohen’s article refers to the “real-estate doom loop” flagged in Putzier’s story, it doesn’t explain why Detroit’s been successful. 

It’s as if the WSJ doesn’t believe its readers can process systemic explanations. Everything’s tied back to individuals. And this is a sophisticated audience which is more highly educated than the average. (Of course, education and income doesn’t predict smarts.) Such a blinkered perspective is risky for society when systems, and especially complex artificial agents with influential agendas, are making the running.