Nifty. This suggestion seems to nicely illustrate what journalism seems to be missing. I see it as analogous to... Think you can operate our press without lo

Nifty. This suggestion seems to nicely illustrate what journalism seems to be missing. I see it as analogous to... Think you can operate our press without losing fingers? Great - we're often looking for replacement operators. Does the machine have guards? Well, we have both a day and a night watchman, why? Think you can operate without ever leaving sponges and instruments behind in patients? Great, set yourself up as a barber surgeon and go for it. Do we count sponges? You'll have to talk to accounting, but they're not that expensive, why? And so on. Responding to operator errors with "well, just stop doing that". Responding to pervasive systemic failures with "well, maybe we need better operators". That's being oblivious to a half century of progress, to minimum standards and best practices, across multiple industries. Some years back, someone said their first-tier newspaper didn't even have a process for tracking errors. Despite an institutional self-image of caring about quality. ISO 9000 has not hit journalism yet?