I would say the initial numbers should be embargoed until the number is reliable. People don’t understand error bars and reporting can more easily manipulate the current situation without outright lying.
Moot point as the people who actually act on the data understand how to roll their own anyway.
Except that those things are constant from month to month, so deltas largely cancel them out.
The problem isn't in the size of the possible errors, but in understanding what those numbers mean and how they are gathered. That requires far more background reading.
If the error bars are large, that is important information to know.
"What sort of startups should I fund?"
"Should my business aggressively hire this quarter anticipating growth, or hold out for a possible recession?"
As for businesses hiring, they should hire based on their own growth. Using an external signal that itself gets adjusted drastically is similarly problematic; I don’t hire because I think no one else is hiring and the numbers get majorly adjusted up. Similarly I hire a bunch of people and it turns out no one else hired.
No one benefits from faster numbers that are majorly shifted in a few months anyway. You wouldn’t make any different decision if no one had the numbers. The only thing you’re doing differently is when the numbers come out your gambling whether or not you think the true number will be revised in some major way in a few months. That’s not helpful for the economy writ large.
The data is available. If it were important to the causal reader, however, then those casual readers would have already demanded its presence. But they don't care. What difference does it make to Hilary Homemaker? She just wants to get to say "Did you hear about the bad economic news?" when gossiping with her friends.
Those who need to understand the uncertainty will already be looking at more than a news headline anyway.