4 ms·

I read a copy last week that I grabbed while in an airport. It had some good articles on China and its military capabilities, but then had a horribly written,

I read a copy last week that I grabbed while in an airport. It had some good articles on China and its military capabilities, but then had a horribly written, pompous article about Google with factually incorrect information and exaggerations. Very disappointing. What is happening to the Economist?

w1ntermute 16y ago
> What is happening to the Economist? Perhaps they are just out of their depth wrt technology articles. They should have probably just stuck to politics/economics.
aristidb 16y ago
Possibly it's just that their writers are of different quality?
- aristidb 16y ago
  I was just trying to say that it need not say much about the newspaper when some articles are good and some are bad, because they employ many writers (anonymously, of course). So perhaps saying that there is a decline in quality is over-analyzing it...
maxawaytoolong 16y ago
On the other hand, does any casual reader of the Economist really know if articles about China's military capabilities are accurate or not?
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
spamizbad 16y ago
> Very disappointing. What is happening to the Economist? Nothing - it's the same magazine it always was. Only this time it's covering a topic for which you have a large degree of expertise. I imagine someone with vast knowledge of China and its military capabilities is shaking their head at the article you just lauded.
- T_S_ 16y ago
  You nailed it. Journalism will always seem "challenged" on a topic on which you are an expert. If they don't completely screw it up with factual errors, give them an A+ and take everything else with a grain of salt. I worked on a biofuels startup for 2 years, focused on a lesser known crop. During that time I did not read a single article on our sector which did not contain major factual errors.

4 ms·

I read a copy last week that I grabbed while in an airport. It had some good articles on China and its military capabilities, but then had a horribly written,

by chopsueyar 16y ago

w1ntermute 16y ago
> What is happening to the Economist? Perhaps they are just out of their depth wrt technology articles. They should have probably just stuck to politics/economics.
aristidb 16y ago
Possibly it's just that their writers are of different quality?
- aristidb 16y ago
  I was just trying to say that it need not say much about the newspaper when some articles are good and some are bad, because they employ many writers (anonymously, of course). So perhaps saying that there is a decline in quality is over-analyzing it...
maxawaytoolong 16y ago
On the other hand, does any casual reader of the Economist really know if articles about China's military capabilities are accurate or not?
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
spamizbad 16y ago
> Very disappointing. What is happening to the Economist? Nothing - it's the same magazine it always was. Only this time it's covering a topic for which you have a large degree of expertise. I imagine someone with vast knowledge of China and its military capabilities is shaking their head at the article you just lauded.
- T_S_ 16y ago
  You nailed it. Journalism will always seem "challenged" on a topic on which you are an expert. If they don't completely screw it up with factual errors, give them an A+ and take everything else with a grain of salt. I worked on a biofuels startup for 2 years, focused on a lesser known crop. During that time I did not read a single article on our sector which did not contain major factual errors.