4 ms·

Obama didn't even use the word "technology". How do you go from "gadgets" to "technology"? Actually, if you're The Economist, the same way you write most articl

by asdflkj 16y ago

Obama didn't even use the word "technology". How do you go from "gadgets" to "technology"? Actually, if you're The Economist, the same way you write most articles about things whose ideology and political affiliations don't agree with yours. This is why I particularly dislike The Economist. They are shrewd. Fox News (or, say, The Guardian) poisons the minds of idiots; The Economist poisons my own unless I am extra careful.

pradocchia 16y ago
Agreed. Appropriately enough: Socrates...feared that relying on written texts, rather than the oral tradition, would “create forgetfulness in the learners’ souls…they will trust to the external written characters and not remember of themselves.”
jbooth 16y ago
Yeah, the Economist is good for foreign reporting and business reporting but since Obama's been elected they've been so clearly biased and/or recycling silly 30-year-old Washington conventional wisdom that I actually didn't renew my subscription.
- asdflkj 16y ago
  Actually, The Economist is particularly bad for foreign reporting, because it is here that their fairly intelligent readers are most willing to trust them. Almost all other Anglophone news outlets don't even make a pretense of providing serious foreign reporting, which gives The Economist a sort of monopoly. Also, BS is harder to recognize when it has no implications for you or anyone you know. http://www.economist.com/printedition/displaystory.cfm?Story_ID=1259408 http://www.economist.com/printedition/displaystory.cfm?Story...
  - jbooth 16y ago
    True, good points. In a lot of their foreign reporting you do see 2 sides to the story and it's less connected to any general ideological principles that the economist would be concerned with, so I guess I'm generally more impressed with it than the american/british/euro reporting. European stuff I just assume that they're biased and I don't know enough about the situation to pick up on it so I skim it and try not to draw conclusions.

by asdflkj 16y ago

pradocchia 16y ago

Agreed. Appropriately enough: Socrates...feared that relying on written texts, rather than the oral tradition, would “create forgetfulness in the learners’ souls…they will trust to the external written characters and not remember of themselves.”

jbooth 16y ago

Yeah, the Economist is good for foreign reporting and business reporting but since Obama's been elected they've been so clearly biased and/or recycling silly 30-year-old Washington conventional wisdom that I actually didn't renew my subscription.

asdflkj 16y ago
Actually, The Economist is particularly bad for foreign reporting, because it is here that their fairly intelligent readers are most willing to trust them. Almost all other Anglophone news outlets don't even make a pretense of providing serious foreign reporting, which gives The Economist a sort of monopoly. Also, BS is harder to recognize when it has no implications for you or anyone you know. http://www.economist.com/printedition/displaystory.cfm?Story_ID=1259408 http://www.economist.com/printedition/displaystory.cfm?Story...
- jbooth 16y ago
  True, good points. In a lot of their foreign reporting you do see 2 sides to the story and it's less connected to any general ideological principles that the economist would be concerned with, so I guess I'm generally more impressed with it than the american/british/euro reporting. European stuff I just assume that they're biased and I don't know enough about the situation to pick up on it so I skim it and try not to draw conclusions.