Why are their poor hiring practices indicative of a problem with the available degree programs to students? Of course, all in-between type jobs would be easier to train for if there was a degree specific to those jobs... but do you really think that anyone went into journalism or art history because there was no software testing degree program available? If they were interested in working with computers, why in the world would they not major (or even minor) in computer science? At best, I could see software testing being being a concentration for students with technology related degrees.
This begs the question: why aren't they hiring fresh, or underemployed CS grads, or people with unrelated engineering backgrounds, to do these jobs, to begin with, if they're finding that the people they hire don't have the appropriate technical skills? I'm guessing that they don't want to pay them well enough to use their expertise. Once they get a degree specific to that field, however, wouldn't they cost just as much as CS grads?
This article is using the fact that they hire people with no relevant training whatsoever, to advocate for a degree in something that should be purely vocational, or on-the-job training. In this job market, it must seem, to recruiters, that their wish are prospective employee and trainer commands, because people are so desperate to get an edge, even in the most basic jobs. This person airing their perspective on the matter shows how skewed their perspective is.