I continue to be amazed at the breadth and depth of coverage in the Economist. Between general world news, science, technology, medicine, business and even book reviews. This is like Time on steriods. The only caveat I have about the Economist is the length of time it takes to read - it is a couple hour per week adventure. If you need ONE news and business magazine - this is the one to subscribe to.
The special reports are useful for getting perspective on today's major issues.Weekly publication insures that the issues are not stale by the time they get around to providing their own analysis.The Wall Street Journal will cover the issues and how you will be affected now,but the economist has more of a global perspective and will focus on different regions of the globe. This is also a great publication if you desire to be that typical haughty stand-offish sort of fellow(haha,it can have the effect of making you look like a smug a-hole), but overall this is a great product.Im satisified with my subscription.
My husband expressed an interest in this magazine after reading a few issues at our daughter's house. Since he never reads anything, I bought him a subscription immediately! He is very pleased with it.
A review posted here criticized the Economist for showing a "Secular Humanist" bias. Here are a few qualities associated with Secular Humanism (cunningly stolen from wikipedia):
"Need to test beliefs - A conviction that dogmas , ideologies and traditions, whether religious, political or social, must be weighed and tested by each individual and not simply accepted on faith.
Reason, evidence, scientific method - A commitment to the use of critical reason, factual evidence, and scientific methods of inquiry, rather than faith and mysticism, in seeking solutions to human problems and answers to important human questions.
Fulfillment, growth, creativity - A primary concern with fulfillment, growth, and creativity for both the individual and humankind in general.
Search for truth - A constant search for objective truth, with the understanding that new knowledge and experience constantly alter our imperfect perception of it.
This life - A concern for this life and a commitment to making it meaningful through better understanding of ourselves, our history, our intellectual and artistic achievements, and the outlooks of those who differ from us.
Ethics - A search for viable individual, social and political principles of ethical conduct, judging them on their ability to enhance human well-being and individual responsibility.
Building a better world - A conviction that with reason, an open exchange of ideas, good will, and tolerance, progress can be made in building a better world for ourselves and our children."
I don't find that the editorial standard of the Economist always meets this irreproachable set of criteria. However, it's often close enough that I have no problem recommending the magazine to everyone.
Excellent coverage by top notch writers on a variety of issues, including economic and business, political, defense and even scientific from both an international and liberetarian perspective. Also includes, every two or three weeks, excellent supplemental sections covering a variety of issues such as the state of international finance, climate change, various countries, etc. The writers, again, are all top-notch and write for a well educated audience (those who may know who Schumpeter is or are at least aware of the differences between Monetarism and Keynesianism, for example). This is definitely not Time or Newsweek.
I too wanted a news magazine that went beyond the usual American celebutante pseudo-news. I'm interested in economics, but am a lay person who is less interested in high finance and investments, and more interested in the stories of our times. The Economist has been a real gem. It is a hefty magazine, and I'm not sure how well I will keep up with it... I wish it was (were?) a biweekly.
I think its British perspective is very useful especially because Americans tend to forget that there really is a world out there (aside from the Middle East and British Royals). It is good to read about ourselves as just another piece of the puzzle. The articles seem well written, much better than most, such that the style does not interfere with the content. In that it reminds me of much of the Wall Street Journal newspaper, which I always find well written. (For the record, at this time my favorite magazines are Christian Century and Ode.)
I look forward to introducing my children and others to this magazine. I think it has a lot to offer and I hope that more people will read it. If I were to change anything about it (aside from making it a biweekly so I could keep up) it would be to have a section where the wider news stories are followed up with examples of their particular effects! A similar result could be achieved by discussing each issue with fellow readers, but really, how likely is that?
The Economist has for decades been a free-market, classical liberal magazine, but has recently under her new editor gotten squishy on all sorts of interventionist government backstop twaddle.
Still,the depth and breadth of coverage is amazing and shames any American newsweekly.
Recently The Economist has beefed up its coverage of Asia (perhaps in response to the death of Far East Economic Review and being able to pick up stringers cheap).
Folks complain of the stiff cover and subscription price, making it a premium or expense account class item. For me it is worth it: Advertising doesn't pay the bills here.
One of the few news magazines that covers the middle east dispassionately and well.
One of the few magazines that actually uses economics and statistics and finance terms well. The editors clearly know and understand what it is they are writing about.
There must be a veritable university staff writing this august publication. Each week it is filled with content covering international events, politics, and business. Though the articles usually tell you what to think on a given topic, they also provide enough background for you to form you own judgments. Ideologically the publication is stridently moderate (from my American perspective), never venturing to the far right or left. If The Economist could accept various responsible points of view and give them a voice in their weekly then, 5 Stars.
"The Economist" is a scholarly news magazine with a focus on the economic side of things. It streams in each week with many overlong articles. You could dedicate an entire evening or two reading the magazine cover to cover, but you probably wouldn't want to. Many of the articles aren't of general interest, but may be up the alley of a macroeconomist. The publisher appears to long for a globalized free-market world. A good magazine for some, perhaps, but not for many, I would say.
I would recommend "The Week" and "U.S. News and World Report" instead of "The Economist."
Used to be a great magazine. However, I found the quality is degrading over time now. Not too much investigative article that provide anything new from what you have read anywhere else. It serves now more like a weekly digest than anything else.