Is it fair to hold journalists to same standard of knowledge as experts?

In many discussions and comments here, the writer points out how much a journalist got wrong, often criticizing their errors as indicating they have no business writing about their subject.

But wait a sec: is it fair to expect individuals whose job is to report to others to the best of their ability to have expertise that can only be obtained by being a professional well-versed in a particular field?

When double-attribution was the norm and un-named sources were grounds for editors to reject a story this was less of a problem.

No, but they've seemed to have abandoned any standards what so ever, that is what people are disappointed about

It's just a big click race and the most exaggerated, bias confirming content brings in the money.

...so are we to blame, us dear readers, for the incentives of the journalist?

[delayed]