As an ex-Soviet teenager I loved reading Forbes in the early 90s. Thomas Sowell was my jam. The business success stories were so addicting. It was the time whe

As an ex-Soviet teenager I loved reading Forbes in the early 90s. Thomas Sowell was my jam. The business success stories were so addicting. It was the time when their advertising slogans were: "Meet Michael Dell. He started reading Forbes at 19". So obviously I wanted success by association. As time moved on (and I moved away from Randism) I read Forbes less and less. I noticed that online standards were much looser than print. What really shocked me when the local (Easter European) print edition of Forbes had a glowing article about a disgraced kleptocrats wife. It was so obviously paid for and below any standards of journalism. So I started thinking whether my early positive opinions of Forbes were somewhat clouded by my youth. EDIT: It seems only New Yorker has stayed true to its quality. That is the articles do not try to outrage you and give respectable space to multiple viewpoints. As in after reading an article about fracking in a small town you would not be gathering pitchforks nor wishing for a private market solution. Just mild and considerate.