The Problem with Journalists

There’s no bigger peeve of mine than when journalists try to act like experts in one breath, and then turn around and say ridiculously stupid things to make their ignorance plain. Take this gem from Jake Tapper:

One interesting note from this story, as Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz.,, and Barack Obama, D-Illinois, go back and forth on McCain’s proposed gas tax holiday: the Independent reports that the Saudi increase in July of an extra half million barrels a day will be coupled “with an appeal to western Europe to cut fuel taxes to lower the price of petrol to consumers.”

Would this mean the Saudis would also support McCain’s gas tax holiday?

And what does that mean, that the Saudis like the idea of fuel taxes being lowered?

Now, leaving aside Tapper’s unseemly penchanct for snide and involved comments, let’s just focus on the sheer stupidity of the above. What the hell do you mean, “what does that mean?” Any high school sophmore in a basic economics class could tell you what that means. Lower gas taxes means lower retail gasoline costs in the West, which means more people buying oil, which means suppliers moving more oil, which means more money in Saudi pockets. If I were Tapper, this is the part where I would say, “duh.”

Journalists should just write things down, and leaving the opining and analysis to people who know what they’re talking about. Or at least got a C in high school economics.