Friday, February 18, 2005
This morning, NPR had a discussion between two experts about the current housing bubble on the coasts. Representing the view that the bubble is unsustainable was Karl Case, an economics professor from Wellesley College and a Visiting Scholar at the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston. Representing the view that the bubble will go on indefinitely was Bruce Karatz who is . . . wait for it . . . the CEO of KB Homes, one of the largest homebuilders in America.
You've got to be kidding me.
In recent years, the media has completely abandoned its investigative duties in favor of "objective stories" and opposing "experts." It's a deplorable state of affairs that is a direct result of the right's continuous bitch slapping of the "liberal" media. I've accepted it as the status quo, but for fuck's sake, if we're gonna play the "he said, she said, you decide" game, at least give us experts who don't have a vested interest in the outcome of the argument. Presenting a home builder as an expert on the sustainability of high housing costs is like presenting Michael Jackson as an expert on the benign effects of child abuse. Clearly, both have much more than an academic interest in being right.
In the legal world, so-called experts are everywhere, and there are safeguards to make sure that not just any jackass can hold forth on specialized topics. An expert witness must demonstrate he is an actual expert with, like, education and publications and stuff before he can take the stand. Even then he can and will be attacked if he has an economic interest in the case.
If the quality of "expert" testimony is important in our private disputes, shouldn't it be important in our public discourse, too?
You've got to be kidding me.
In recent years, the media has completely abandoned its investigative duties in favor of "objective stories" and opposing "experts." It's a deplorable state of affairs that is a direct result of the right's continuous bitch slapping of the "liberal" media. I've accepted it as the status quo, but for fuck's sake, if we're gonna play the "he said, she said, you decide" game, at least give us experts who don't have a vested interest in the outcome of the argument. Presenting a home builder as an expert on the sustainability of high housing costs is like presenting Michael Jackson as an expert on the benign effects of child abuse. Clearly, both have much more than an academic interest in being right.
In the legal world, so-called experts are everywhere, and there are safeguards to make sure that not just any jackass can hold forth on specialized topics. An expert witness must demonstrate he is an actual expert with, like, education and publications and stuff before he can take the stand. Even then he can and will be attacked if he has an economic interest in the case.
If the quality of "expert" testimony is important in our private disputes, shouldn't it be important in our public discourse, too?
Comments:
Post a Comment
