1. . Conveying Hope VI: A comparative analysis across Newspaper, think tank, and governmental arenas Jolene Crixell University of California san Diego Department of urban studies and planning Urban expo 2011 What is hope VI? Implemented in the 1990s the Housing Opportunities for People Everywhere (Hope VI) program, administered by the Department of Housing and Urban Development, sought to revitalize the country’s worst housing projects. This was achieved by demolishing housing projects in major American cities, replacing them with mixed income developments, and re- locating many former residents. Research question How are Hope VI’s outcomes measured, interpreted, and communicated across newspaper, think tank, and governmental arenas? The purpose of this study is to understand the discourse surrounding Hope VI by utilizing content analysis of New York Times, Urban Institute, and government documents. Research strategy Documents, published between 1998 and 2003, were aggregated from online and library archives. Key issues, pertaining to the Hope VI program, were outlined to evaluate each document by. Each variable was coded into SPSS. Publications were read, thoroughly analyzed, and coded into the data set. The data was then cross tabulated allowing for meaningful analysis. Key findings The New York Times primarily used anecdotal evidence in its coverage of Hope VI, government documents relied on statistical measures, and the Urban Institute most often used a combination of methods. The Urban Institute was most likely to report on resident resistance to the Hope VI program, while both the New York Times and government publications neglected the issue in approximately half of the documents. Suburban opposition to re-located public housing residents was deemed a critical issue in scholarly literature, but was rarely addressed in New York Times or government publications. The Urban Institute led the coverage, mentioning the issue within 41% of its documents on Hope VI. Race was explicitly mentioned in 53% of New York Times articles, 75% of Urban Institute publications, and 57% of government documents. Gentrification was addressed in less than 15% of New York Times and government publications, but appeared in 50% of Urban Institute documents. When it was mentioned, The New York Times took a unanimously negative view on gentrification while the government publications reflected a consistently positive view. The Urban Institute reports viewed gentrification mostly negatively, but also portrayed it positively in a few instances. Conclusions Methods of reporting on Hope VI greatly varied between the different arenas. The Urban Institute was most likely to report on issues that were deemed important in the scholarly literature on Hope VI. The lack of coverage, on critical issues such as resistance and gentrification, can be understood as a deficiency in newspaper and government reporting. This is especially problematic in the governmental arena, where policy pertaining to Hope VI continues to be crafted *The tables and graphs use data collected by, and were created by, the author.