The Economist

{{title-italics}}[[File:TheEconomistLogo.svg|right|thumb|165px|In case you haven't guessed, this is their logo.]]{{media}}
{{cquote|As a longtime reader of ''The Economist'', let me just say that in the past six years I have come to the conclusion that in five important issue areas--U.S. [[politics]], U.S. [[economics]], finance (U.S. and global), [[Middle East]]ern politics, and [[Africa]]n politics — anything ''The Economist'' states that I did not already know is likely to be wrong... And it's the reason I pay much more attention these days to the ''Financial Times''.|||[[Brad DeLong]]<ref>http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2007/03/cringing_and_wh.html</ref>}}

'''''The Economist''''' is a [[British]] magazine, founded in 1843, that covers [[business]], world [[politics]], [[science]], and technology. Their editorial stance is (traditional sense of) [[Centrism|centrist]]-[[liberal]], advocating free markets, a social safety net, and personal freedom. They favor [[globalization]], [[free trade]], and increased spending on [[healthcare]] and [[education]], as well as [[War on Drugs|drug legalization]]<ref>(October 12, 2022). [https://www.economist.com/leaders/2022/10/12/joe-biden-is-too-timid-it-is-time-to-legalise-cocaine "Joe Biden is too timid. It is time to legalise cocaine"]. ''The Economist''.</ref> and [[gay marriage]]. Historically, they have endorsed both [[Republicans]] and [[Democrats]] in [[US]] elections, as well as [[Tories]], [[Liberal Democrats]], and [[Labour Party|Labourites]] in [[UK]] elections.

The magazine is one of the most respected in the world of its kind, claiming the readership of many influential policy-makers and executives.{{efn|In the past, the comments section of the website was packed with lots of Internet [[wingnuts]], supporting what ''The Economist'' wrote on one article and opposing what they wrote on the other. Naturally, many of the commenters hated ''The Economist'' for being too [[moderate]]. Fortunately, like many websites, ''The Economist'' noted the low quality of the vast majority of the commentators, and eliminated comments when the site was redesigned between 2017 and 2019.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20161015142501/http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21708723-healthy-democracies-depend-unwritten-rules-republican-nominee-has-trampled-all-over?spc=scode&spv=xm&ah=9d7f7ab945510a56fa6d37c30b6f1709 "The debasing of American politics",] Economist, 2016 October 15, archived on 2016 October 15</ref><ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20180617104311/https://www.economist.com/leaders/2016/10/15/the-debasing-of-american-politics "The debasing of American politics"], Economist, 2016 October 15, archived on 2018 June 17</ref><ref>[https://medium.economist.com/help-us-shape-the-future-of-comments-on-economist-com-fa86eeafb0ce "Help us shape the future of comments on economist.com"], Denise Law, The Economist, 2017 Jan 10</ref><ref>[https://archive.ph/Bxrpu "The Economist's new website",] Economist, 2019 September 15, archived on 2023 March 11</ref>}}

==Hmm==
{{cquote|In the 1860s, The Economist stood nearly alone among liberal opinion in Britain in supporting the Confederacy against the Union, all in the name of access to cheap Southern “Blood Cotton” and fear of higher tariffs if the North triumphed. “The Economist was unusual,” writes an historian of English public opinion at the time; “Other journals still regarded slavery as a greater evil than restrictive trade practices.”|||''[[The Nation]]'', "''The Economist'' has a slavery problem"<ref>Grandin, Greg, [https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/economist-has-slavery-problem/ "'The Economist' has a slavery problem"], 9 September 2014.</ref>}}

==Criticisms==
''The Economist'' is intended for a highbrow, well-educated, upper-class audience, and it shows. Most of its writers (who don't attach their names to articles, but rather hide behind pseudonyms or don't give a name at all) are graduates of Oxbridge (including young and fresh ones). Because of its serious tone, readers may be deceived into thinking they must be experienced and distinguished journalists. Therefore, the magazine steers clear of [[vulgar libertarianism]], but tends towards espousing [[Free market|free markets]] and [[privatization]] as a solution to almost every problem. Having said that, ''The Economist'' staff are by no means free-market fundamentalists; they just have a strong bias towards market solutions, though they also support state intervention for some things (like healthcare). On foreign policy, they have a mixed record and notoriously were [[chickenhawk]]s when it came to the [[Iraq War]], a position they later regretted.

Despite all this, their highly liberal positions on social policies and rational opinions when it comes to science mean a left-leaning reader can peruse the magazine without their head exploding. Indeed, the magazine, oddly enough, has a small cult following among radical leftists, much like [[Al Jazeera|Al Jazeera America]] does.

''The Economist'' hates [[political correctness]] so much that they despise [[Gender-neutral pronoun|gender-neutral language]] and characterized the word "humankind" as part of the "ugly expressions of PC culture".<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20150517065858/http://www.economist.com/style-guide/political-correctness ''The Economist'''s Style Guide to Political Correctness]</ref>

Although previously it published articles that were sympathetic to [[transgender]] people,<ref>(June 5, 2018). [https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2018/06/05/malta-leads-the-way-for-gay-and-transgender-rights-in-europe "Malta leads the way for gay and transgender rights in Europe"]. ''The Economist''.</ref><ref>(July 27, 2017). [https://www.economist.com/democracy-in-america/2017/07/27/donald-trumps-ill-considered-ban-on-transgender-soldiers "Donald Trump’s ill-considered ban on transgender soldiers"]. ''The Economist''.</ref><ref>(September 1, 2017). [https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2017/09/01/why-transgender-people-are-being-sterilised-in-some-european-countries "Why transgender people are being sterilised in some European countries"]. ''The Economist''.</ref> the magazine has at times been [[transphobia|transphobic]].<ref>Trudy Ring (July 29, 2021). [https://www.advocate.com/media/2021/7/29/respected-news-magazine-economist-publishes-anti-trans-screed "Respected News Magazine The Economist Publishes Anti-Trans Screed"]. ''The Advocate''.</ref> Related to hatred against political correctness from the magazine, the rough turning point in their overall tendency on the issue appears to have been former editor [[Helen Joyce]]'s (see: [[Helen Joyce#Anti-trans punditry|Helen Joyce § anti-trans punditry]]) 2018 "series of invited essays", during which ''The Economist'' published opinions from both sides albeit slightly unequally (five more pro-trans, eight more anti-trans).<ref>Nico Lang (March 26, 2019). [https://www.dailydot.com/irl/helen-joyce-economist-transphobia/ "Editor’s history of calling trans people ‘frauds’ shines light on Economist’s transphobic tweet"]. ''The Daily Dot''.</ref><ref>Helen Joyce (June 29, 2018). [https://www.economist.com/open-future/2018/06/29/transgender-identities-a-series-of-invited-essays "Transgender identities: a series of invited essays"]. ''The Economist''.</ref> This "Lexington" left ''The Economist'' around 2022–2023, but you can still occasionally find headlines like "[[Transgender ideology|Trans ideology]] is distorting the training of America's doctors" in the magazine.<ref>(January 8, 2022). [https://www.economist.com/united-states/2022/01/08/trans-ideology-is-distorting-the-training-of-americas-doctors "Trans ideology is distorting the training of America’s doctors"]. ''The Economist''.</ref>

==="We'll all go together when we go."===
{{cquote|We will all go together when we go<BR>
All suffuse with an incandescent glow<BR>
No one will have the endurance to collect on his insurance<BR>
Lloyd's of London will be loaded when they go<BR>|||[[Tom Lehrer]]'s "We Will All Go Together When We Go"<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GiibRWnq1I We'll all go together when we go] by Tom Lehrer, ''YouTube''.</ref>}}
''The Economist'' in 2023, suddenly panicking about the possibility of [[World War III]] with the onset a major war between [[Israel]] and Gaza ([[Palestine]]) during the time of the ongoing [[Ukraine#Russian invasion of Ukraine|Russia-Ukraine]] war, came up with the obliviously-titled article "What a third world war would mean for investors". The article offered historical advice on investing opportunities prior to [[World War I|World Wars I]] and [[World War II|II]], but concluded, "Today there is a greater and more terrible source of uncertainty, since many of the potential belligerent powers wield nuclear weapons. Yet in a sense, this has little financial relevance, since in a nuclear conflagration your portfolio’s performance would be unlikely to rank highly among your priorities."<ref>[https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2023/10/30/what-a-third-world-war-would-mean-for-investors What a third world war would mean for investors: Global conflicts have a habit of sneaking up on money-managers] (Oct 30th 2023) ''The Economist''.</ref>

==External links==
*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KJSnd8VzQw Homer reads ''The Economist'']
*[http://felixsalmon.tumblr.com/post/77595188595/this-picture-has-been-doing-the-rounds-and-its Breaking down ''Economist'' charts] (Because [http://www.economist.com/node/21599953 they're cheeky.])
*[http://www.economist.com/node/8133766 This article never existed.]  No, really.  Don't show it to anyone.
*[http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2010/07/cant-anybody-play-this-game-diagnosing-our-economic-ills.html Proof that you can't hide whoever is responsible for writing articles by not carrying a byline.] 
*[http://www.vox.com/xpress/2014/9/4/6107803/the-economist-tried-to-notallwhitepeople-slavery More proof that you can't hide whoever is responsible for writing articles by not carrying a byline. ][https://www.theatlantic.com/culture/archive/2014/09/the-economist-is-sorry-about-its-not-all-slave-masters-book-review/379685/ ''The Economist'' later apologised]
*[http://m.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/05/us-credibility-fallacy-ukraine-russia-syria-china/361695/ Also gets into occasional chickenhawk fits.]

==Notes==
{{reflist|group=note}}

==References==
{{reflist}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Economist, The}}
[[Category:Liberalism]]
[[Category:Magazines]]
[[Category:British media]]
[[Category:Transphobia]]

Categories: Liberalism, Magazines, British media, Transphobia