[causi]

What is this? A stub of an article with no author whose only content is "Trump is best buddies with a group of tech bros" with no comment on what that means or predictions about what policy decisions it implies. Is this AI-generated?

[swores]

It's not very long anyway, but for you to call it a stub I assume you're just saying the beginning as they want you to subscribe (pay) for access.

Archive.today has the full version here: https://archive.ph/bat3k

(edit: corrected link)

And, as mentioned elsewhere in this thread's comments, no author's name is the policy of The Economist for all their articles.

[mike_hearn]

The full version is also a stub. The stubbiness of it is because they weren't able to talk to anyone. The moment the organizers realized they were an Economist writer they got thrown out.

[oskarkk]

Even if they weren't able to talk to anyone at this particular event, they could write much more on the subject. I'm disappointed that the article "The PayPal Mafia is taking over America’s government" is just "there was some Trump event, right-wing tech bros that raised money for Trump were there, they don't like OpenAI, legacy media and the Economist, and they threw us out" and then it ends. I feel like I was baited into reading this, expecting some deeper analysis of the relationship between Trump and his new tech friends and it's consequences. Even the hate for "legacy media" is a thing that they could write much about, and that short article could be a nice introduction for a deep dive about that. But as it stands, this article has little value.

[mike_hearn]

Well yeah, they could have done written many interesting and useful things but they chose to write about how awful the "male energy" was instead. That's why they now get tossed out of the places where things are happening, where once they'd have been welcomed.