This feels like using some mental gymnastics to prove a point. I'm not saying the conclusion is wrong just that it's a strange way to present the data and left me unconvinced of the conclusion - something the author caveated throughout the article.
As far as news analysis goes, the Economist isn't perfect, but it's certainly better than most of the stuff out there.
News is mostly a description of factual events that occurred.
What you're talking about is opinion pieces about the news, and yes, those should generally be not taken seriously (at least 90% of them). Especially the hot twitter takes, etc.
It may not be 100% accurate all the time, but it can still give you food for thought.