I'm not sure anyone wants to pay journalists what a world-class cryptographer makes.
The big problem with journalism right now is the complete disconnect between the journalist and their understanding of the topic. Just look at every software or bitcoin article. This is largely because of the internet's turn-around speed requirements and low pay. They have no time to invest in learning about the topic.
The only way to save journalism is if we start contributing to it like we do OSS. Instead of paying people minimum wage and expecting quality results, we have people who contribute articles on the side.
But not just anybody writing (like blogging), but people who invest in learning how to write - working with full-time editors who manage the input and source writers.
A good chunk of news requires personal presence and connection. For example, if you're covering a state legislature or a city government, you just have to spend a lot of time getting to know legislative staff and other people around the capitol or city hall. And you have to have enough readership for them to be willing to talk to you. You might be able to do that in your spare time for a small town, but I don't think it's possible for anything more substantial.
The same is true of investigative journalism. Deep stories take months of research and writing. They take real budgets, real skills, real editorial backing.
I write a lot for fun, and have for years. But there's only so far that fun can take you, and those places don't include the most important societal functions of journalism.
Journalists tend to have their own cultural biases--although more on political topics than technical ones. But, even if I won't write things I don't believe, I still choose the topics I discuss in public.
Glenn Greenwald actually argues for transparency in advocacy rather than pretending that an objective journalist even exists. Long-winded conversation about it here: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/28/opinion/a-conversation-in-...
Also check Paid Content for a bit of a summary: http://paidcontent.org/2013/10/28/glenn-greenwald-vs-the-nyt...
You're on to more than you give yourself credit for there. Much modern journalism is an integral part of the political system, and many papers fit into your $PROPRIETARY_COMPANY variable quite neatly.
There is some separation between party and paper, but I think as far as politics goes, we're pretty close to the hypothetical situation you describe.
I was an engineering major but I was involved with newspapers in various respects through school and there was definitely a certain "perspective" with the mainstream publications.
I really love the idea of this, but I think its infeasible given time constraints in every industry, including press. I do think there is room and cross-disciplinary talent in media organizations for a journalist reporting on a (for example) programming heavy topic to grab someone from their engineering staff to collaborate and then share a by-line. If you have someone with domain knowledge in-house you might actually save research time and get a better article even with more people working on it.
Though some of the bias might be naturally eliminated as the quality of journalists is improved.
Much less likely to have bias or feel pressure from their newsroom bosses.