hey Russell re: making the Economist think getting a letter or comment published, and then doing an op-ed or a piece for them could be a start to working towards your end goal. the afterlife / faking death bit may be the hardest bit though
The article was a chuckle. I will try your advice and read it backwards. And if this article doesn't make you "very interesting" at least to The Economist, then I don't know what will.
Nice piece. Agreed, backwards is better. During the GFC I didn't read any section except for science and technology, the rest was too depressing. Also read Nikkei Asia and FT, but the latter is becoming too 'tabloidy'.
Started at 22, and now at 25, the economist is almost the only publication worth reading. Everything else is too short cited, and unfortunately, too poorly written to matter. Oh, and sometimes, there are absolutely bangers that you wouldn't get anywhere else. Almost unexpectedly expected.
Great stuff Russell but my late father was a magazine publisher (yes, The Economist is a magazine!). He used to insist that the only way to read any magazine was backwards. It had something to do with advertising.
I’d be curious to know your reasons for dumping the FT? I find it to be indispensable (as long as I skip the “opinion” pages). If there is a decent substitute I have not found it. The WSJ is almost worthless for global and the Asia focused papers (I do read SCMP, Nikkei) are focused on Asia as you would expect. I do read The Economist in almost the same manner as you do, but I tear out articles I want to read and throw away the leftist cheerleading.
hey Russell re: making the Economist think getting a letter or comment published, and then doing an op-ed or a piece for them could be a start to working towards your end goal. the afterlife / faking death bit may be the hardest bit though
The article was a chuckle. I will try your advice and read it backwards. And if this article doesn't make you "very interesting" at least to The Economist, then I don't know what will.
Nice piece. Agreed, backwards is better. During the GFC I didn't read any section except for science and technology, the rest was too depressing. Also read Nikkei Asia and FT, but the latter is becoming too 'tabloidy'.
Started at 22, and now at 25, the economist is almost the only publication worth reading. Everything else is too short cited, and unfortunately, too poorly written to matter. Oh, and sometimes, there are absolutely bangers that you wouldn't get anywhere else. Almost unexpectedly expected.
Great stuff Russell but my late father was a magazine publisher (yes, The Economist is a magazine!). He used to insist that the only way to read any magazine was backwards. It had something to do with advertising.
strongly agree re reading the economist backwards, but if you are UK based the FT is pretty hard to skip imo
I’d be curious to know your reasons for dumping the FT? I find it to be indispensable (as long as I skip the “opinion” pages). If there is a decent substitute I have not found it. The WSJ is almost worthless for global and the Asia focused papers (I do read SCMP, Nikkei) are focused on Asia as you would expect. I do read The Economist in almost the same manner as you do, but I tear out articles I want to read and throw away the leftist cheerleading.
I guess some people are dying to get into The Economist these days. Fresh piece. Thanks
Not so middle aged (31) but still a man who loves The Economist.