5 ms·

http://pressthink.org/2010/11/the-view-from-nowhere-questions-and-answers/ http://pressthink.org/2010/11/the-view-from-nowhere-question... There are other, bet

http://pressthink.org/2010/11/the-view-from-nowhere-questions-and-answers/ http://pressthink.org/2010/11/the-view-from-nowhere-question... There are other, better, rebuttals but this is from someone who can't really be impeached on ideological grounds. Also, the idea that Mother Jones is "left-wing-nut territory" is ....bad. Unless your yardstick is "distance from more or less explicit white nationalism of breitbart" then Mother Jones is solidly center-left. Finally the graph you posted is pretty bad. The Economist is an ideological chop shop with no bylines that started life as a forum for propoganda agitating against the Corn Laws. The idea that their minimally distant from an axis of "minimal bias" is not exactly born out by the facts.

vpribish 9y ago
there's always room for more nuance, but the widely understood left-right model is useful. add more dimensions as needed. on a crude left/right i'd put the economist near the middle: they are far from neutral, but also far from either of those edges.
tgb 9y ago
My father is a liberal newspaper reporter and describes The Economist as the best hope for journalism. If you have to stretch to smear it by pointing out the lack of bylines and its start over 150 years ago, then I have to wonder what your biases are. The Economist has its slant for sure but your characterization of it is extreme.
- dtornabene 9y ago
  Not at all, in fact my characterization of it was pretty restrained. https://www.thenation.com/article/economist-has-slavery-problem/ https://www.thenation.com/article/economist-has-slavery-prob... https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/09/economist-review-slavery-110687 https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/09/economist-re... https://www.colorlines.com/articles/five-problems-economists-special-report-latinos https://www.colorlines.com/articles/five-problems-economists... I could add in its tolerance if not open affection for Fidez the anti-semitic Hungarian political party, or its virulently anti-union posturing, or its hatred of the welfare state.... I could go on, specifically just about their ideology and how it permeates everything thats published there, but its a lost cause on this website.
  - vpribish 9y ago
    Those articles are not really convincing - two are regarding one book review, one criticizes the British reader for mispronouncing Spanish names (among other nit-picks). Those sources are very obviously biased (which is fine) and don't nearly constitute objective, or moderate, or broadly-accepted source of commentary. If you were a regular reader of the Economist you would know how they actually look at anti-semitism (scornfully), labor-relations (respectful of labor, critical of populism and unchecked power), the welfare state (maybe conservative in the UK, downright progressive for the US - see anything they cover on healthcare). Their ideology does permeate all of their work. The reason they are so well respected is that their ideology is well-reasoned, and their research and writing is very high quality.

vpribish 9y ago

there's always room for more nuance, but the widely understood left-right model is useful. add more dimensions as needed. on a crude left/right i'd put the economist near the middle: they are far from neutral, but also far from either of those edges.

tgb 9y ago

My father is a liberal newspaper reporter and describes The Economist as the best hope for journalism. If you have to stretch to smear it by pointing out the lack of bylines and its start over 150 years ago, then I have to wonder what your biases are. The Economist has its slant for sure but your characterization of it is extreme.

dtornabene 9y ago
Not at all, in fact my characterization of it was pretty restrained. https://www.thenation.com/article/economist-has-slavery-problem/ https://www.thenation.com/article/economist-has-slavery-prob... https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/09/economist-review-slavery-110687 https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/09/economist-re... https://www.colorlines.com/articles/five-problems-economists-special-report-latinos https://www.colorlines.com/articles/five-problems-economists... I could add in its tolerance if not open affection for Fidez the anti-semitic Hungarian political party, or its virulently anti-union posturing, or its hatred of the welfare state.... I could go on, specifically just about their ideology and how it permeates everything thats published there, but its a lost cause on this website.
- vpribish 9y ago
  Those articles are not really convincing - two are regarding one book review, one criticizes the British reader for mispronouncing Spanish names (among other nit-picks). Those sources are very obviously biased (which is fine) and don't nearly constitute objective, or moderate, or broadly-accepted source of commentary. If you were a regular reader of the Economist you would know how they actually look at anti-semitism (scornfully), labor-relations (respectful of labor, critical of populism and unchecked power), the welfare state (maybe conservative in the UK, downright progressive for the US - see anything they cover on healthcare). Their ideology does permeate all of their work. The reason they are so well respected is that their ideology is well-reasoned, and their research and writing is very high quality.