Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 22, 2017 17:07:23 GMT
Just taken a three month subscription to this and am reading the first couple of issues to come through the door. Cajoled into it by a 'free' Moleskin notebook.
Hmmmm. I'm not sure it's as good as it's cracked up to be. Lots of negative news but little by way of solutions. Seems mainly a rag for advertising government funded positions. Am I mssing something?
|
|
|
Post by iancapetown on Jan 22, 2017 18:03:05 GMT
"Lots of negative news but little by way of solutions. "
Isn't that what reportage is about? Tell it as you see it, but don't offer an opinion after that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 22, 2017 20:25:51 GMT
Ah so! Just more journalistic rubbish dressed up as analysis. Two surveyors would do the job of 100 journalists with time to spare for real work.
|
|
Avant
Full Member
Posts: 691
|
Post by Avant on Jan 22, 2017 22:33:59 GMT
""Lots of negative news but little by way of solutions. "
I don't know about reportage, but that's exactly what economics is all about.
OK, that may not be entirely fair, but it's certainly the attitude of a lot of economists.
All I know about economics is the First and Only Law - the right price of something is what some other poor sap will pay.
|
|
|
Post by Alanović on Jan 23, 2017 10:26:11 GMT
Just taken a three month subscription to this and am reading the first couple of issues to come through the door. Cajoled into it by a 'free' Moleskin notebook. Hmmmm. I'm not sure it's as good as it's cracked up to be. Lots of negative news but little by way of solutions. Seems mainly a rag for advertising government funded positions. Am I mssing something? You appear to have defined brexit there. Which is pretty much the entirety of the economic situation right now (pending shafting from the USA notwithstanding, although of course without brexit we wouldn’t be offering them our arses quite so desperately), so I’m a bit surprised that you’re surprised.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2017 10:32:57 GMT
It not so much I 'm surprised by the negative news, but The Economist advertises itself as a more cerebral magazine offering in depth analysis. But if you do in depth analysis, possible solutions should automatically should emerge as well. However these are conspicuous by their absence.
Anyway I've cancelled the Direct Debit (a one off £12 for twelve weeks) and got the nice Moleskin books on my desk now...
|
|
|
Post by crankcase on Jan 25, 2017 8:33:16 GMT
I have to say I feel the same about New Scientist. I have a nostalgic feel for it - when I was pretty tiny, I found a stash of old magazines in the back of the wardrobe. Clearly, other children would have found copies of Playboy, and probably therefore been brought up on Norman Mailer articles, but for me, those early sixties New Scientists were great. Pretty incomprehensible, but they soon sparked an interest in flying cars, atom bomb shelters, and some new fangled technology called a "transistor". And that would then induce the ever-present cry of my childhood - "To the Library!".
Today, NS all feels a bit simplified, and that's most certainly not because I've got any cleverer. So I end up having to try and comprehend the articles in Nature or whatever, and they are often Really Hard Work for a non-scientist.
Difficult to find the right balance.
I feel the same about BBC Horizon - used to actually have some equations, or a scientist telling you something. Now it's all "explosive secrets" and funny camera angles, but no real content to think about.
Actually, I should see if I can find a sixties NS article online somewhere and see if I'm spouting my usual nonsense.
|
|