The MTA lawsuit gets mostly ignored in print, though the "pretty rotten deal" (as per Russianoff) affects a lot of people

So, how seriously did New York's major newspapers take the lawsuit filed yesterday that challenges the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's sweeter deal with Forest City Ratner for the Vanderbilt Yard?

The New York Times relegated coverage to a City Room blog post, with a one-paragraph reference in the print paper. The New York Daily News mentioned the suit in the last two paragraphs of a page 14 article (not yet online) on today's eminent domain suit.

The New York Post took the story more seriously, with six paragraphs in print, on page 2. The freebie Metro gave it five short paragraphs.

AY fatigue?

Maybe the press has "Atlantic Yards fatigue." However, among public authorities, the MTA likely affects the daily life of the most people in New York City.

“We think the MTA agreed to a pretty rotten deal with Forest City Ratner that produces little money for the transit system and that hurts the riding public,” Gene Russianoff of the Straphangers Campaign told the Bond Buyer.

Shouldn't the press care just a little whether the Public Authorities Accountability Act was violated?

[Here's the archived Brooklyn Paper article mentioned in the comment. I was addressed "major newspapers," but should've mentioned the Brooklyn Paper as a neighborhood paper.]]