It bothers me that the Economist advertises itself as a magazine for thinkers. This worries me only because I don't know to what extent their readers understand that the magazine is 25% news, 25% historical summary, and 50% opinion, in each and every article.
In this week's edition, the Obama campaign is described as a near-messianic campaign with a strong belief in the candidate's perfection. That's not news; that's opinion unsupported by facts. If this were include a poll of campaign supporters, then one might be warranted in making such a statement.
Then Lexington brings us the phrase "Bush derangement syndrome" and the argument that both Obama and McCain are against torture (which is unsupported by McCain's vote for the Military Commissions Act and the prohibition on the CIA's use of the technique).
Informing or whitewashing?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment