4 ms·
As somebody who has been reading it even longer, I disagree. We live in an age of increasing polarization. Asymmetric polarization, I should add; look at how t
by wpietri 4y ago
As somebody who has been reading it even longer, I disagree.
We live in an age of increasing polarization. Asymmetric polarization, I should add; look at how the US House has changed since 1980 or so: https://xkcd.com/1127/large/ https://xkcd.com/1127/large/
The Economist has long been attempting to straddle common political divides even as those divides grow larger. This has been causing fragmentation everywhere. Look, for example, at the Libertarian party in America, which is falling apart right now [1] as they drop antisemitic memes [2] and say it's fine.
All of this is happening at the same time they've shifted from a weekly cadence to continuous publishing, meaning less time to ponder, with a significant expansion in volume of content.
I think they're doing a decent job of keeping it together, but the cracks are showing. E.g., their "by invitation" pieces are by nature platforming people and avoiding most of their editorial standards. They are surely cheap to produce and good clickbait, but I think it's a mistake. I also see right-wing framings creeping into pieces more often than before.
Admittedly, it's a hard problem. When the leader of the Republican party is supping with bigots [3], there's no longer a clear line between mainstream views and the awful fringe. So I'm still subscribing and I hope they work it out. But I also wouldn't mind finding some alternatives these days so that if things get worse, I have options.
[1] https://www.thedailybeast.com/libertarian-party-is-fighting-a-civil-war-over-its-right-wing-mises-caucus https://www.thedailybeast.com/libertarian-party-is-fighting-...
[2] https://boingboing.net/2022/11/15/libertarian-party-embraces-antisemitism.html https://boingboing.net/2022/11/15/libertarian-party-embraces...
[3] https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=trump+kanye+fuentes&tbm=nws https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=trump+k...
- tekla 4y ago> heir "by invitation" pieces are by nature platforming people and avoiding most of their editorial standards. > I also see right-wing framings creeping into pieces more often than before. There we go, you think its worse because it doesn't 100% cater to your views.
- wpietri 4y agoIt is true that I disagree with some of the right-wing framings, but I don't object on that account. I've never entirely agreed with The Economist, but that hasn't kept me from enjoying it and finding it useful. But the US right has from my perspective gone insane. Take as an example the belief that Trump won the 2020 election. A majority of Republicans (and only Republicans, not independents, Democrats, or people outside the US) believe that Joe Biden did not legitimately win: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/01/07/republicans-big-lie-trump/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/01/07/republica... And unfortunately, it's not confined to the US. From Boris Johnson to Jair Bolsonaro to Viktor Orban and well beyond, there are a lot of politicians on the right who you can't really call conservative in that they, like Trump, have repudiated a lot of traditional conservative values like honesty, accuracy, and integrity. My problem is that the Economist, whose tone for me has always been one of cool reason, whose founding goal was "to take part in 'a severe contest between intelligence, which presses forward, and an unworthy, timid ignorance obstructing our progress,'" is letting the crazy leak in. As I said, it's a hard problem to stay balanced in unbalanced times, so I have sympathy for them. But that doesn't mean I'm going to pretend the problem doesn't exist.
- Manuel_D 4y agoThe Economist has repeatedly and emphatically rejected the lie that the 2020 election was stolen. I'm really not seeing any "crazy leak in". Pretty much all "crazy" views I can think of the Economist rejects vigorously.