King Banaian gets it. Responding to Rodrik's discussion starter, he writes,
Because I read more now, I think research is improved too.
I'll second that. And...
I worry about the lemons problem only insofar as one thinks econoblogging is about spreading the word of what's on the cutting edge of economics research or the policy debates. I have never concerned myself with the former, and as to the latter, I'm not terribly convinced that the best policy analysis comes from the economists with the longest c.v.'s. Again, that might be about where I'm from and what I do, a personal bias.
Since I, like Banaian, am on the faculty of a "Non-Flagship State U" we share a similar perspective. I agree that excellent policy analysis can come from economists without a long c.v. So if you can't judge a blog's quality relative to the market solely on the basis of the academic prestige of the author or his/her institution, does that lead to a breakdown of the market? No. Links are the currency of the realm here, and they are the way that information gets passed along. Suppose a brand new blog reader drops in on the economic corner of the blogosphere tonight. After how many minutes of clicking around will he or she figure out who the heavy hitters are? It probably wouldn't take long to get the lay of the land. A lot of those readers will never pick up a copy of the American Economic Review, much less Econometrica. And yet, they will figure out whose blogs are worth reading (and probably figure out who's got the best academic pedigrees as well). Whether their list of favorites would put their c.v.'s in rank order or not, well... de gustibus non est disputandum.
The blogosphere, even just the economics corner, is a big place with room for many styles and approaches. Rodrik seems to have come around on the question that kicked off this whole discussion as well. We'll gladly give him a mulligan on this one. In the world of blogging, that happens, and that's one of the things that makes all this interesting...and valuable.
I'm hopeful but conflicted about all of this.
What I've noticed, particularly over the last 2 years, is that the big academic names are making big splashes in the blog pool without seeming to try very hard. I'm still not sure if this is good or bad.
I don't seriously think the world is worse off because Greg Mankiw's blog was an instant success (or a bunch of other big C.V. folks). I'm just not sure how much better it is. Tyler Cowen I think has made the world a better place through Marginal Revolution.
Further, I think Mankiw is going in the right direction. The world is definitely not improved by having someone of his caliber overwhelmed by comments.
But, on the whole, I have this overwhelming sense that there was this really good party going on, and the popular kids showed up and it got really boring and tame.