[yuy910616]

I've been reading the Economist for about 10 years. It provides great coverage on big issues, and recently, some fun ones (billie eilish comes to mind).

It's unique in that it feels "slower", more deliberate, and thoughtful than most newspaper/tv channels. It gives context and covers multiple viewpoints before giving an opinion. Its daily espresso newsletter and quarterly tech issues are always interesting too.

I've subscribed to NYT and WSJ over the years, but none feels as differentiated as the Economist. (Haven't tried Financial Times, if someone has and likes them, please do share your thoughts)

[klelatti]

The obituaries in the Economist (at the back) are often poignant and insightful, and sometimes cover individuals who deserve to be better known.

I remember a joint obit in 2008 of Jack Scott (weather forecaster) and Reg Varney (who starred in British sitcom On The Buses). Not an expected pairing.

https://www.economist.com/obituary/2008/12/04/jack-scott-and...

[fiftyacorn]

reg varney - the first person to publicly use a cash machine

[klelatti]

And the first cash machine used cheques with radioactive Carbon 14 rather than plastic cards!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6230194.stm

[bobthepanda]

The Economist is great, but it definitely wears its biases on its sleeve; it hasn’t quite found a problem the free market can’t solve.

[aitait]

I tend to disagree. While a pro market magazine, it often suggests strong government actions. I think you have never dealt with real fee market fetishists.

The only annoying things is the double Christmas issue and the "New Year outlook". They always write the same. The world has never been better and everything becomes better and next year will be better than the last.

[dredmorbius]

Free-market propaganda is quite literally The Economist's design intent:

And now we beg to submit the following detail of the plans which we have thoroughly organised to carry into effect these objects of our ardent desires, in the following PROSPECTUS of a weekly paper, to be published every Saturday, and to be called THE ECONOMIST, which will contain— First.—ORIGINAL LEADING ARTICLES, in which free-trade principles will be most rigidly applied to all the important questions of the day—political events—and parliamentary discussions; and particularly to all such as relate immediately to revenue, commerce, and agriculture; or otherwise affect the material interests of the country.

https://www.economist.com/unknown/1843/08/05/prospectus

[lordgrenville]

It is biased, but I wouldn't agree with that (just for example, they oppose ACA repeal).

What I like most about it is how many of the articles are structured sort-of dialectically: "Here is a problem, here is what we think should be done, here are one or more alternative proposals and arguments against what we suggested, here's why we think that despite that this is the best of the options." It gives you the impression that the writer has considered opposing ideas, weighed up the trade-offs, and nominated the least bad course of action. Of course it's easy to find places they were wrong (supporting the Vietnam and Iraq II wars didn't age well), but it's so much better than most periodicals and op-eds where the writer only argues their own view as the only wise and moral option.

[dukeyukey]

I don't know about that, they definitely encourage government intervention in certain situations; they aren't market-is-lord types.

[specialist]

I was fine with The Economist. They advocate their beliefs, still want to reduce human suffering, still consider opposing views with respect.

I hate ambulance chase style reporting. So I most like the magazine-style news recap of current events, giving stuff 1-4 weeks to settle down before picking over the wreckage. None of the USA imitators have ever done as well (Newsweek).

I don't like unsigned bylines, but I get that's their thing.

With so many poor imitators, their dry wit (editorial voice) now just sounds snarky. I'm so done with it. As a Gen X, Boomers and my fellow Gen X exhaust me.

I canceled my subscription over their support for the second Iraq War. I can carry a grudge. I haven't resumed The Atlantic for the same reason.

But I've since filled my attention budget with more left leaning content. Neoliberalism had it's day. I'm interested in what comes next. Not becoming a curmudgeon yelling at the kids to get off my lawn. So I doubt I'll ever resub to The Economist.

I do miss the both special topic and the regional focus issues.

[trailrunner46]

If you like the Economist then you might like Bloomberg Business Week. I know I expected it to be bad but it’s actually wonderful. The design team is amazing. I find it the perfect mix of business/economy and pop culture. Often there are 2 or 3 long form articles on a truly fascinating subject.

[soupfordummies]

Their journalists do a year end “jealousy list” website that is always creatively designed and filled with a TROVE of great articles from the year from all over. I never really see it talked about but I get excited for it every year. Keep your eyes peeled in about a month!

[TooSmugToFail]

Love the Economist.

At previous work, we had Financial Times subscription. It, obviously, is a more finance-bent, but I find it a delight in journalist professionality and the deepness of commentary.

The weekend edition gives a more eclectic mix of topics and is a really informative read.

I simply love FT.

[paganel]

> I simply love FT.

For what it's worth I've direct email-ed two of their opinion writers and they dutifully responded (and not the standard "thank you for your email/for reading my piece" stuff), I really appreciated that. For comparison, the journalists from my country are more primadonas, I don't see them answering any readers' emails (for starters, their email addresses are not provided in the newspaper's website).

[kqr]

Thank you! I used to read the Economist a few years ago but had to stop for various life technical reasons. The latest one is that my infant tries to tear anything made of paper apart -- but your comment made me look up whether there's a Kindle edition of the Economist and there is! Maybe not on par with the print one for me, but certainly better than nothing!

[gallegojaime]

Related to the Economist's areas of writing: what do people think of Harvard Business Review? Does it have valuable content?

[satya71]

HBR occasionally has good pieces and does make me think. Mostly they are fluff pieces advanced by writers with vested interests.

[vsskanth]

You can subscribe to their newsletter. I was subscribed but eventually got bored as their content was too generic and not actionable

[gallegojaime]

I had my suspicions about their content being too idealistic, being directed to that 'flavor of the month' manager audience. But it's a sin that doesn't really go away with the Economist, either.

[alexpetralia]

No.

[gallegojaime]

Why not?

[janpen]

Weekly news is such a great cadence and I love the audio recording they publish with each issue.