12 ms·

I took out an Economist subscription for the first time this year, and I've found it really mixed. Lots of interesting articles, but I'll agree the analysis isn

I took out an Economist subscription for the first time this year, and I've found it really mixed. Lots of interesting articles, but I'll agree the analysis isn't as good as many other sources I've seen (in my view). What's the bigger blocker for me is the anti-LGBT+ lean. For example the most recent article on trans rights: November 19th - 25th 2022 issue, "Transgressions", page 29 in print. It's not even the insidious "see both sides" argument you see often, but just unbalanced rehash of old claims with no analysis, research, or further thought. In the same issue, The Economist jumped to the defence of Qatar (“In defence of Qatar”, page 18 in print) with the argument that while Qatar was terrible for LGBT+ rights, so have been pervious world cup holders. To me that’s not even an argument, that’s just a defeatist “oh well it was bad before so why bother complaining”. I’m all for accepting viewpoints that are different from my own, but when it comes to “should LGBT+ people have rights” that’s not up for debate.

rsynnott 4y ago
Oh, yeah, for about two months any time I opened Facebook (in fairness, once a week) it was pushing that article at me. Really lowered my opinion of the Economist; a very low quality article more befitting of something like the Telegraph.
LocutusOfBorges 4y ago
Seconding this. I cancelled my subscription quite a few years ago in light of the low quality of analysis in the UK section of the paper - it felt like tabloid journalism aimed at people who thought too highly of their class status and level of education to deign to read a real tabloid, yet essentially at the same level of insight, peppered with a few affected rhetorical flourishes conveying an aesthetic of educated sophistication. It’s very much a newspaper designed to give people without the time or inclination to develop a substantial understanding of an issue a quite superficial overview, packaged alongside an opinion that can be regurgitated as required to give the impression that one has a respectable understanding of the matter in question (at the very least, outside some of its more detailed feature articles). …Even in light of that, the rapidity of the decline in its coverage of LGBT+ human rights has been extraordinary, even by UK standards. The fact that prominent editorial staff at the newspaper (Helen Joyce, for one) are extremely prominent anti-transgender activists probably has something to do with it - but the sheer venom of its coverage really took me aback when I started following its current turn. The issue certainly isn’t specific to it, given the broader anti-trans/LGBT+ turn in the UK press as a whole, but the Economist stands out as one of the worst for it.
- Aromasin 4y ago
  Just looked her up briefly. The pieces seem to fall in place: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helen_Joyce https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helen_Joyce
zoenolan 4y ago
Same here. They published some bad article on trans rights, a few weeks before my subscription was up for renewal. It wasn't really something I could support. Cancelled after 15 years or so

rsynnott 4y ago

Oh, yeah, for about two months any time I opened Facebook (in fairness, once a week) it was pushing that article at me. Really lowered my opinion of the Economist; a very low quality article more befitting of something like the Telegraph.

LocutusOfBorges 4y ago

Seconding this. I cancelled my subscription quite a few years ago in light of the low quality of analysis in the UK section of the paper - it felt like tabloid journalism aimed at people who thought too highly of their class status and level of education to deign to read a real tabloid, yet essentially at the same level of insight, peppered with a few affected rhetorical flourishes conveying an aesthetic of educated sophistication. It’s very much a newspaper designed to give people without the time or inclination to develop a substantial understanding of an issue a quite superficial overview, packaged alongside an opinion that can be regurgitated as required to give the impression that one has a respectable understanding of the matter in question (at the very least, outside some of its more detailed feature articles). …Even in light of that, the rapidity of the decline in its coverage of LGBT+ human rights has been extraordinary, even by UK standards. The fact that prominent editorial staff at the newspaper (Helen Joyce, for one) are extremely prominent anti-transgender activists probably has something to do with it - but the sheer venom of its coverage really took me aback when I started following its current turn. The issue certainly isn’t specific to it, given the broader anti-trans/LGBT+ turn in the UK press as a whole, but the Economist stands out as one of the worst for it.

Aromasin 4y ago
Just looked her up briefly. The pieces seem to fall in place: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helen_Joyce https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helen_Joyce

zoenolan 4y ago

Same here. They published some bad article on trans rights, a few weeks before my subscription was up for renewal. It wasn't really something I could support. Cancelled after 15 years or so