The Economist mixes snarky comments and snippets of opinion into their coverage to a much greater extent than other media outlets. Their “opinion” pieces (leaders) are sometimes just a truncated version of the longer “news” article later in the issue.
Not saying it’s a bad thing; they’re pretty open about it and that’s how they’ve always been.
The Economist’s reporting is widely recognized for its absence of bias.
I’m not sure what you’re criticizing about the leaders. They are well-reported opinion pieces intended to provide a comprehensive overview of an issue, hence why they seem like “truncated versions” of articles.
The “snippets of opinion” to which you refer are reporting on public opinion. I thought that was obvious.
The Economist mixes snarky comments and snippets of opinion into their coverage to a much greater extent than other media outlets. Their “opinion” pieces (leaders) are sometimes just a truncated version of the longer “news” article later in the issue.
Not saying it’s a bad thing; they’re pretty open about it and that’s how they’ve always been.
This is materially incorrect in multiple ways.