Is picking a newbie or a charlatan that much worse than listening to a journalist who interviews a newbie or a charlatan? Or one who doesn’t understand the subj

Is picking a newbie or a charlatan that much worse than listening to a journalist who interviews a newbie or a charlatan? Or one who doesn’t understand the subject (as is usually the case) and totally mangles what they get from an actual expert? I’d rather at least take my chances at picking an actual expert. You can see how bad journalism is when you read a popular article on something you do understand deeply. Now consider that it’s probably about that bad on every subject. The problem is that you must understand something deeply to report on it well or describe it well. Only a programmer can be a good journalist on software. Only a former military person can do good war reporting. Etc. If you don’t know what you are talking about you can’t talk about it well.