The Economist Magazine 1 Year Gift Sub for $69

[Majesty]

Ir works for Canadians too!

You can get the magazine for 95$ (CAD). Click the URL and change the /us/ for /ca/.

Enjoy!!

 

[djchemistry]

Lol, here's a typical article for the economist sounds like:

Palestine at a "Crossroads" - Abbas' Last Stand.

[begin reciting facts in argumentative format rather than the typical journalist style of opening up with the scene or the action to orient the reader. (of course this is not a daily print, so they do not need to often get the reader up to date on the events themselves.)]

[then cite a few facts (disclaimers) that aren't favorable to cover the argument's weaknesses]

[then say how the story or argument can't truly predict what will happen]

[wait a week or so for the events to roll out and then write another article about how write the previous article was in its facts, even if the main point of the article did not come to fruition.]

At this point, you as a reader begin to realize that many of the stories are just fact laden editorials. And that the facts sound better in the Economist, because of their argumentative style. Marshalling facts to make a point for the reader after all, is much easier than letting the reader form their own hypothesis and researching/testing it in later news updates.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy reading the economist as well. However, I often run into people who see it as the end, all be all of thoughtful discussion on an issue. Some people think economists are more often right than journalists. I just think newspapers and magazines do not prefer the economists' format in America for most journalists. (of course there are magazines like the New Yorker or Atlantic Monthly in the U.S. that do not write in a typical journalist style)

Bottom Line: Hot Deal for the Mag. Not so hot, if you're only looking for well informed and factual argument. You can find that for much cheaper. It only costs a few thoughts.

 

[cyberia]

Originally posted by: GZeus

Originally posted by: cyberia

Originally posted by: intogamer
Bump... I have the $$$ for it should I still get?

I signed up back in early November and just recently received a bill for $69. No magazines yet, though.

Just got my bill for it as well and I haven't seen a mag yet either. I might just send in the payment anyway as this deal is so nice I don't want to be denied the price.

That's what I did too.

 

[bitt3n]

Originally posted by: djchemistry
Lol, here's a typical article for the economist sounds like:

Palestine at a "Crossroads" - Abbas' Last Stand.

[begin reciting facts in argumentative format rather than the typical journalist style of opening up with the scene or the action to orient the reader. (of course this is not a daily print, so they do not need to often get the reader up to date on the events themselves.)]

[then cite a few facts (disclaimers) that aren't favorable to cover the argument's weaknesses]

[then say how the story or argument can't truly predict what will happen]

[wait a week or so for the events to roll out and then write another article about how write the previous article was in its facts, even if the main point of the article did not come to fruition.]

At this point, you as a reader begin to realize that many of the stories are just fact laden editorials. And that the facts sound better in the Economist, because of their argumentative style. Marshalling facts to make a point for the reader after all, is much easier than letting the reader form their own hypothesis and researching/testing it in later news updates.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy reading the economist as well. However, I often run into people who see it as the end, all be all of thoughtful discussion on an issue. Some people think economists are more often right than journalists. I just think newspapers and magazines do not prefer the economists' format in America for most journalists. (of course there are magazines like the New Yorker or Atlantic Monthly in the U.S. that do not write in a typical journalist style)

Bottom Line: Hot Deal for the Mag. Not so hot, if you're only looking for well informed and factual argument. You can find that for much cheaper. It only costs a few thoughts.

well, completely objective journalism is exceedingly difficult to come by even in respectable newspapers. one could argue that reading well-considered if opinionated journalism with whose opinions one does not agree can be more enlightening than reading a mere factual statement of events which one will, if he is like most people, then organize according to his own pre-conceived notions.

 

[djchemistry]

I don't believe in objective journalism. I believe that journalism should stand for free speech (definitely a partisan position) and should always look critically upon the government (didn't used to be, but these days even this seems like a partisan issue).

But getting back to the point, isn't much of the gripe with news media in America the fact that opinions are infused into the coverage, sometimes even overtly. I look at the Economist and see a common problem in Great Britain. Surprise, a country led by their Labor Party to go to war in Iraq. Their journalists could not call Bush out on his arguments for war in Iraq either.

So maybe it's not the substance of the opinion in the news coverage, but the fact that there are so many obvious and prevalent opinions expressed in the news coverage today both here and in Great Britain. But anyway, I meant the story to be a little satirical of the Economist.

After all, the magazine does argue a few stories from a very different and admittedly unique perspective. Sometimes those perspectives mean getting under the nail of governments here or there across the globe. That doesn't seem to bother the Economist any.

By the way, when I have a choice I prefer the Financial Times for international news, probably because it more closely resembles a typical, daily newspaper. Now where to look for those subscriptions....

 

[cyberia]

Got my first issue on saturday. Thanks OP.