How 'The Economist' Thinks (2017)

currentaffairs.org

7 points·ivm··4 comments

Freelance journalist checking in: Current Affairs trashing The Economist is hardly surprising. I'd expect nothing less— as a newer pub you need to differentiate yourself from the marquee names in the field and challenge the more conservative establishment.

For what it's worth, Current Affairs pays $125-250 for 3000 word articles, while The Economist pays a dollar a word or more, and I think that's readily apparent when you compare the two (which I realize is not the point of the article, just trying to provide some context).

It would be more useful if you would explain what was mistaken about this article's criticisms of The Economist. Specifically, is it mistaken when it says the magazine is completely uncritical of the free market? Or or do you agree it is, but think that this is the proper view?

Sorry didn't see this! If you read The Economist, it's strongly in favor of free markets, but I personally don't think it's zealous about that stance. It's also strongly pro-regulation and many articles criticize governments for not doing enough on the regulatory side. So yes, if the article actually says the Economist is completely uncritical of the free market (didn't see that), I think that's inaccurate.

There's also a lot of money behind the arguments made in the Economist that isn't there for a Left-Wing magazine (for obvious reasons).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com