For me the main problem with most of these publications is that although oftentimes they couch things in data and science they are mostly opinion-based so their

For me the main problem with most of these publications is that although oftentimes they couch things in data and science they are mostly opinion-based so their prognostications are quite fallible. They remind me of the "The Standard" and "Business 2.0" etc., of the aughts. While things were going up, they seemed to catch the wave and ride it, but as the bubble burst their faults due to lack of any underlying structure or rigor became evident. So too with The Economist, not to speak of things like The Atlantic etc., who rely mostly on opinion or tenuous data. Now, often The Economist tries to rely on some science/data but they have their own ideology and that leads to them making mistakes as well. I wish they relied more on science and data over ideology (such as free markets or globalization, etc., not to say those are bad, but just have some skepticism and criticism. They often took globalization to be an unqualified good)