I’ll politely agree to disagree. I’ve seen The Economist labeled as neoliberalist, but my personal opinion is that they tend to push more for centrism and social democracies in the articles and podcasts i’ve consumed.
If OP has access to these magazines, it doesn’t hurt for them to check it out for themselves.
Now in terms of media literacy, i’ll throw this into the ring. When reading an article, we should categorise what we read into the following. Verifiable Fact (ie, it is possible to obtain primary evidence that it had happened), Opinion (Someone’s interpretation of a piece of information in context of their own bias or goals), or Fabrication (Generalisation, unverifiable evidence, No True Scotsman arguments, etc).
I tried to call out the bias that The Economist has for OP, but it doesn’t change that their ‘Factual Reporting’ is high. You may not agree with their Opinion of what the facts mean. But it doesn’t change factuality if it is verifiable. Given OP’s interests “politics, philosophy, interesting facts, history, social issues.” I maintain that The Economist is among the most well written magazines that provide what he/she is looking for.
And on the note of bias, i’ll ask. “Is Lenin’s opinion of a Western magazine in context of UK inaction in WW1 following Germany’s invasion of Serbia really the most unbiased evaluation, nor is it even a relevant evaluation given that it was made over a hundred years ago?”
moistclump
davel
communism
FirstCircle