DeLong's solution is that
no reporter should be allowed to write anything about Democratic economic policy proposals without checking and digesting (a) the Financial Times, (b) the news pages of the Wall Street Journal, (c) the Economist, and (d) the comments of a trusted list of Republican weblogs.Of course no journalist can hope to inform his readership until he is himself informed. But the real questions, I think, are why journalists are so uninformed, why editors publish the uninformed bullshit they produce, and why media outlet owners don't step in and boost standards.
The real solution lies, I fear, not in remedial education for journalists, but in reformulating corporate structure of our jouralistic media. In short, breaking up the great media empires who deliver such crap to our doors. Because the companies are so large, their decision-makers are insulated from their customers. Big media companies aren't sensitive enough to generate good copy--especially good, politically charged copy. And politically charged copy is WHY we have a free press in the first place.
Reporters who make their name based on their readers' opinions rather than on their boss's boss's boss's opinion will report more effectively simply because they have to. Editors who work closer to the pulse of their readership can ill afford stupid writing. And owners who operate smaller shops need to pay more attention to each customer, because each customer represents a greater percentage of her total revenue. Lots of small companies make editorial decisions will produce better journalism than a few big companies. Set up the incentives, and the reporters will learn what they have to in order to survive.
