Why I read the Economist
Francis Muir
An article in the Science and Technology section of this week's
Economist begins, "On the face of it, Shakespeare's view of men
appears to fit the male pied flycatcher rather well."
As a person whose politics are somewhat leftish, I occasionally
have some qualms about my dedicated reading of this economically
conservative journal, but then they come up with things like this.
How do they do it? I mean, are there classes at public schools
or Oxbridge that teach you how to do this?
I am reminded of an American tourist who was visiting Arundel Castle and
was much taken by the exquisite nature of the lawns. Out of curiosity he
asked a gardener working in the Orangery how it came about. "Simple, really",
said the Duke of Norfolk (for it was he), "we planted dam' fine seed and
then rolled it for 1000 years". Your first lesson is never, ever use the
word "Oxbridge" again. Oxford and Cambridge are as chalk and cheese and
only come together for one brief moment every year to entertain the masses
on the Thames at Putney. The Boat Race. Oxford generally wins nowadays, but
sometimes the Thames does. There was a memorable occasion not too long ago
when both both boats sank and quite independently.
As for the Economist, it should be pointed out that while they are
conservative, they are not Conservative. Working a similar vein, the
Financial Times provides a simple way of picking up the news in England
without getting bogged down in rhetoric.
Fido
Crawford Kilian
The Economist. It's not just that...most print media have been going
down-market for 30 years or more, trying to dumb themselves down enough to win
the attention of a TV-drugged public. Perhaps the saddest American example is
the recent self-lobotomization of Time Magazine--which in its early days had a
brittle, witty style that lent itself to mockery but certainly didn't insult
its readers' intelligence.
The Economist, whatever its politics (and I find its confident tone sometimes
absurd), has aimed for a market of educated, literate readers who want
information rather than glitzy layouts and color photographs. While it's
expensive compared to the US and Canadian newsweeklies, on a per-fact basis
it's the best bargain around.
Mike Godwin
>Perhaps the saddest American example is
>the recent self-lobotomization of Time Magazine--which in its early days had a
>brittle, witty style that lent itself to mockery but certainly didn't insult
>its readers' intelligence.
I don't know that TIME's decline has been that recent, Crawford. My own
opinion is that the quality of writing and reporting in NEWSWEEK surpassed
that of TIME in the early '70s (NEWSWEEK's Watergate reporting was
superior, of course, since it had the advantage of being a Washington Post
company). Nowadays, one sees very good stylists in NEWSWEEK, from Peter
Goldman to Jonathan Alter to Eleanor Clift. The regular columnists--George
Will, Meg Greenfield, Jane Bryant Quinn, Robert Samuelson--are all far
more memorable and have more to say than old fuddy-duddies like TIME's
Hugh Sidey and bland folks like Charles Krauthammer. The only weak point
on NEWSWEEK's writing time is Jerry Adler, whose features are reliably
shallow, sensationalistic, petty, and self-important. (He wrote the racist
piece on the threat of rap music, for example, and his piece on the
Allen/Farrow/Previn gossip was particularly silly.)
--Mike
--
Mike Godwin, |"The meeting of two personalities is like the contact
mnem...@eff.org| of two chemical substances: if there is any reaction,
(617) 864-0665 | both are transformed."
EFF, Cambridge | --Carl Jung
John Nall
>In article <14...@mindlink.bc.ca> Crawfor...@mindlink.bc.ca (Crawford Kilian) writes:
>
>>Perhaps the saddest American example is
>>the recent self-lobotomization of Time Magazine--which in its early days had a
>>brittle, witty style that lent itself to mockery but certainly didn't insult
>>its readers' intelligence.
>
>I don't know that TIME's decline has been that recent, Crawford. My own
>opinion is that the quality of writing and reporting in NEWSWEEK surpassed
>that of TIME in the early '70s (NEWSWEEK's Watergate reporting was
[ ... further discussion deleted ... ]
Oh, come on, now. Both TIME and NEWSWEEK, as well as practically all of the
daily newspapers, have changed their format/substance to try and "appeal to
what the public wants". It nauseates the professional journalists (the term
"professional" is used in the sense of "real" :-) in this instance) but the
upper management mandates it. So although in one sense they can be blamed,
in another sense they're only giving people what they want. (Not *all* people,
of course. Neither I nor thou). They have to either make a profit or go into
bankruptcy.
Not sure how the Economist continues to thrive. Probably it is only a matter
of time :-(
John
--
John W. Nall | Supercomputer Computations Research Institute
na...@mailer.scri.fsu.edu | Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32306
Actually, love means that you *do* have to say you're sorry, even
if you're really not in the least bit sorry. - (me)
Mark Taranto
Francis Muir writes:
Jon Corelis writes:
. . . Oxbridge . . . .
Your first lesson is never, ever use the word "Oxbridge" again.
Yes, please refer to them as the Harvard and Princeton of England.
(or should that be the Yale and Stanford). Oh well, you get the
idea.
Mark
Emma Pease
>Not sure how the Economist continues to thrive. Probably it is only a matter
>of time :-(
Well, they did just add a sports section and the cultural section is
fairly new.
another Economist reader,
Emma
Mike Godwin
writes:
>Oh, come on, now. Both TIME and NEWSWEEK, as well as practically all of the
>daily newspapers, have changed their format/substance to try and "appeal to
>what the public wants".
I'm not sure how this is meant to be a response to what I wrote, John.
No one is disputing that these publications have changed their formats.
My posting, which you quoted, addressed the difference in quality between
the writing and reporting of two American newsweeklies. Your introductory
"Oh, come on now" suggests that you are trying to take issue with me, yet
your posting doesn't seem to address what I said at all.
Frank Mulhern
people mentioned to me that it was the best magazine they ever read. I must
say that I now look forward to its arrival every Monday. When I look at
a TIME or NEWSWEEK today, I am reminded more of network TV newscasts that
print journalism. Those magazines have lots of flashy pictures, stories with
a sentimental twist, etc. In fact the topics written about in those
magazines closely parallel what on TV. I agree that these magazines
participate in the dumbing of America---a great phrase by the way, for more
on this read BAD--The Dumbing of America by Paul Fussell (1991).
The Economist is considered to have the world's best reporting on third
world countries. It is nice to read something that does not have a
politically oriented liberal or conservative ax to grind, although The
Economist is very conservative economically with a relentless attitude
that free markets will solve ALL the world's economic ills.
Do yourself a favor--read it.
Frank Mulhern Department of Marketing
Penn State 814-865-0232 FJM1 @ PSUVM
John Nall
>In article <10...@sun13.scri.fsu.edu> na...@sun8.scri.fsu.edu (John Nall)
>writes:
>
>>Oh, come on, now. Both TIME and NEWSWEEK, as well as practically all of the
>>daily newspapers, have changed their format/substance to try and "appeal to
>I'm not sure how this is meant to be a response to what I wrote, John.
>"Oh, come on now" suggests that you are trying to take issue with me, yet
>your posting doesn't seem to address what I said at all.
>
>--Mike
Sorry. Apologies. You are, of course correct. The "Oh, come on now"
really didn't refer to your post, but to the whole thread. But I agree
that it looked like I was referring to your post. So humble apologies :-)
Jack Campin
[ comparing The Economist favourably with Time
and Newsweek, which is not saying very much ]
> The Economist is considered to have the world's best reporting on third
> world countries.
Considered by who exactly?
Better than Le Monde Diplomatique, Liberation, Middle East Report, South,
2000'e Dogru, Searchlight South Africa, New Internationalist, Race and
Class, the Journal of Palestine Studies, Z, Al-Fajr, Covert Action
Information Bulletin, Amnesty, NACLA and the Times of India? Geezabrek.
> It is nice to read something that does not have a politically oriented
> liberal or conservative ax to grind, although The Economist is very
> conservative economically with a relentless attitude that free markets
> will solve ALL the world's economic ills.
Which means that it *does* have a conservative axe to grind, doesn't it?
There are two classes of magazines out there: ones that state out front
that they've got a political agenda and those that lie about it. Time,
Newsweek and the Economist are in the latter category.
Followups to rec.mag.
--
-- Jack Campin room G092, Computing Science Department, Glasgow University,
17 Lilybank Gardens, Glasgow G12 8RZ, Scotland TEL: 041 339 8855 x6854 (work)
INTERNET: ja...@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk or via nsfnet-relay.ac.uk FAX: 041 330 4913
BANG!net: via mcsun and uknet BITNET: via UKACRL UUCP: ja...@glasgow.uucp
Jon Corelis
I first decided to subscribe to the Economist when I opened a copy at
random and noticed a story on the U.S. budget deficit headlined, "Make
me fiscally responsible, Lord, but not yet." I decided that any journal
which headlined an article on the federal deficit with an allusion to
Saint Augustine -- and assumed that its readers would get it! -- simply
could not be passed up.
Another favorite Economist headline of mine was the one they used for
an article on Canandian natural resource management policy: "I'm a
Lumberjack and I'm OK."
As for Time, I haven't read it for years, but my memory is that its
writing "style" was almost entirely a matter of two particular prose
gimmicks. One was the rhyming name: "Vice President Dan Quayle (rhymes
with fail.)" The other was the habit of prefacing a proper name with a
pair of descriptive adjectives: "Folksy, affable Ronald Reagan," or
"Square-jawed, brutal Saddam Hussein." I term the latter trope the
schema joyceanum, for reasons which will immediately be obvious to any
educated reader.
Mike Godwin
>The other was the habit of prefacing a proper name with a
>pair of descriptive adjectives: "Folksy, affable Ronald Reagan," or
>"Square-jawed, brutal Saddam Hussein." I term the latter trope the
>schema joyceanum, for reasons which will immediately be obvious to any
>educated reader.
Stately, plump Barbara Bush? The mind boggles.
But to me a distinguishing characteristic for both TIME and NEWSWEEK
has been, not the use of preceding adjectives, but the use of
preceding appositives, usually capitalized, as in "White House Chief of
Staff James Baker."
Katherine M. Catmull
> Nowadays, one sees very good stylists in NEWSWEEK, from Peter
>Goldman to Jonathan Alter to Eleanor Clift.
Also--it must be told, Michael--a very close friend of Mr. Godwin's
(and mine) writes for NEWSWEEK.
> The regular columnists--George
>Will, Meg Greenfield, Jane Bryant Quinn, Robert Samuelson--are all far
>more memorable and have more to say than old fuddy-duddies like TIME's
>Hugh Sidey and bland folks like Charles Krauthammer. The only weak point
>on NEWSWEEK's writing time is Jerry Adler, whose features are reliably
>shallow, sensationalistic, petty, and self-important. (He wrote the racist
>piece on the threat of rap music, for example, and his piece on the
>Allen/Farrow/Previn gossip was particularly silly.)
Absolutely agree about all of the above, and triple-agree about Jerry
Adler.
But I'll tell you the truth, I still wouldn't read it if it weren't for our
friend slaving manfully away in the Business section. NEWSWEEK is so
much better than TIME; but it is still too brightly-colored in every
sense of the word to make me comfortable with it.
Kate
--
- - - - - - - -
ka...@cactus.org
Be the voice of night and Florida in my ear.
Clayton Cramer
> As for the Economist, it should be pointed out that while they are
> conservative, they are not Conservative. Working a similar vein, the
> Financial Times provides a simple way of picking up the news in England
> without getting bogged down in rhetoric.
>
> Fido
And even by the current definition of "conservative" in America,
they aren't conservative. Note their oft-expressed feelings about
gun prohibitionism.
--
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer My opinions, all mine!
Alcohol prohibition didn't work; drug prohibition doesn't work; gun
prohibition won't work.
Clayton Cramer
> The Economist, whatever its politics (and I find its confident tone sometimes
> absurd), has aimed for a market of educated, literate readers who want
> information rather than glitzy layouts and color photographs. While it's
> expensive compared to the US and Canadian newsweeklies, on a per-fact basis
> it's the best bargain around.
I would be more impressed with the _The Economist_ if they got the
facts right. Their coverage of Florida's 1987 revisions to the
concealed weapon statute were severely in error (at least, if you
bother to read the statute). On the plus side, while they reported
it wrong, they at least reported the change. None of the U.S.
newsweeklies covered this rather dramatic change.
Francis Muir
Francis Muir writes:
As for the Economist, it should be pointed out that
while they are conservative, they are not Conservative.
And even by the current definition of "conservative" in America,
they aren't conservative. Note their oft-expressed feelings about
gun prohibitionism.
The Economist does not operate under American definitions, it is a
British institution. In Great Britain there is nothing conservative about
a pro-gun position. There has never been a time in british history when
owning weapons has been anything but the prerogative of the Armed Forces.
The sole exception has always been hunting weapons.
Fido
a...@vax.oxford.ac.uk
>
> An article in the Science and Technology section of this week's
> Economist begins, "On the face of it, Shakespeare's view of men appears
> to fit the male pied flycatcher rather well."
>
> As a person whose politics are somewhat leftish, I occasionally have
> some qualms about my dedicated reading of this economically conservative
> journal, but then they come up with things like this. How do they do
> it? I mean, are there classes at public schools or Oxbridge that teach
> you how to do this?
Ah, yes, the Economist. I have long been convinced that some of the articles in
that journal are written by idiots. Four years ago, we were treated to a few
paragraphs explaining why Oxford's Varsity match victory that year was a triumph
for free-market economics. One has to admire the single-mindedness (not to say
monomania) of the person who wrote it, but anybody who had attended Oxford or
the other place would have known that this is just the natural order of things,
and has no more to do with economic theory than the law of gravity.
Michael.
MICHAEL WISE
>I don't know that TIME's decline has been that recent, Crawford. My own
>opinion is that the quality of writing and reporting in NEWSWEEK surpassed
>that of TIME in the early '70s (NEWSWEEK's Watergate reporting was
>superior, of course, since it had the advantage of being a Washington Post
>company). Nowadays, one sees very good stylists in NEWSWEEK, from Peter
>Goldman to Jonathan Alter to Eleanor Clift. The regular columnists--George
>Will, Meg Greenfield, Jane Bryant Quinn, Robert Samuelson--are all far
>more memorable and have more to say than old fuddy-duddies like TIME's
>Hugh Sidey and bland folks like Charles Krauthammer. The only weak point
>on NEWSWEEK's writing time is Jerry Adler, whose features are reliably
>shallow, sensationalistic, petty, and self-important. (He wrote the racist
>piece on the threat of rap music, for example, and his piece on the
>Allen/Farrow/Previn gossip was particularly silly.)
>
But you don't get it, Mike. Saying one American newmagazine is better
than another is like saying Coke is better than Pepsi, when your original
subject was Chardonnay. On one hand, you have nothing but sugar, coloring,
and water; Timeweek & World Report, with their fluff articles, glitzy
photos and complete disregard for what the reader knows (or would like to
know, even if he has to check an encyclopedia for it) sadly seem to be
regular fare for American readers, even though they are so unreliable
that high school debate teams are cautioned against using them as a source,
and undergraduates must search elsewhere for articles relevent to their
term papers. On the other hand, The Economist is well-written, well-reasoned,
and not reluctant to take a stand on issues. It lacks the American glitz:
most of its photos come out of the files, and all of them are in black and
white. But The Economist does not follow the credo that seeing is believing
rather that knowing comes from well informed thought, thought that is only
stimulated by reading. One only has to look at the number of pages (130 to
70), the amount of copy-space compared to picture and white space, to see
the difference.
I have to recommend good newsmagazines to my undergraduates for their
term papers. As it stands, there is no American newsmagazine on that
list. Quite a shame, I've always felt, that the best news about America
comes from London.
Michael Wise
alias O Captain! My Captain!
UNLV English Dept.
Matthew Huntbach
> world countries. It is nice to read something that does not have a
> politically oriented liberal or conservative ax to grind, although The
> Economist is very conservative economically with a relentless attitude
> that free markets will solve ALL the world's economic ills.
> Do yourself a favor--read it.
I find the Economist's analyses to be very shallow, and its
presentations badly over-simplified - it reads like it's aimed
at the intelligent sixth-former. I suppose the only reason
it is so valued in the USA is the lack of anything better.
Matthew Huntbach
JHenderson
that is intelligent, informative, well-written, and entertaining.
I refer, of course, to The Nation. The regular columns by, in
particular, Christopher Hitchens, Alexander Cockburn and Edward
Said are streets ahead of anything found in The Economist and its
ilk.
--
==================================================================
-Jeremy Henderson | Une souris verte
egp...@castle.ed.ac.uk | Qui courrait dans l'herbe
==================================================================
Francis Muir
I'm surprised to have seen no mention of the one US news magazine
that is intelligent, informative, well-written, and entertaining.
I refer, of course, to The Nation. The regular columns by, in
particular, Christopher Hitchens, Alexander Cockburn and Edward
Said are streets ahead of anything found in The Economist and its
ilk.
Yes, I have been surprised at the mindless and inordinate amount of attention
that TIMESWEEK has been getting -- as though they were the only sources of
news. I cannot wait to read the soon to appear thread on USA TODAY. I
thought that Matthew Huntbach had the Economist dead to rights -- aimed
at Six-Formers, although that description wil pass over most Merkun heads.
Personally, I miss TIME & TIDE. Lady Rhondda's rag was beautifully printed,
and had the most interesting competitions. Of the American pop weeklies,
PEOPLE magazine is the least pretentious and has rather good film reviews.
certainly their standard of writing is quite superior to TIMESWEEK. Of
course, their straightforward style might not appeal to the pseudo
intellectual RAB mindset.
Fido
Mike Godwin
>And even by the current definition of "conservative" in America,
>they aren't conservative. Note their oft-expressed feelings about
>gun prohibitionism.
I feel compelled to point out that Great Britain has no Second Amendment.
Few American conservatives would regard, say, Margaret Thatcher as a
liberal if she favored gun control measures (as I feel certain she does).
Mike Godwin
>But you don't get it, Mike. Saying one American newmagazine is better
>than another is like saying Coke is better than Pepsi, when your original
>subject was Chardonnay.
Your conclusion is unwarranted. I enjoy THE ECONOMIST and regard it as
superior in most respects to both TIME and NEWSWEEK. I was responding to
a particular comment of Crawford Kilian's about TIME.
You will forgive me, I hope, if I don't think the difference between the
American newsweeklies and THE ECONOMIST is quite so vast as you do.
As I said above, I do think the magazine is superior in most respects,
but I wasn't trying to talk about THE ECONOMIST in the posting to which
you respond here.
Coke *is* superior to Pepsi, by the way.
>On one hand, you have nothing but sugar, coloring,
>and water; Timeweek & World Report, with their fluff articles, glitzy
>photos and complete disregard for what the reader knows (or would like to
>know, even if he has to check an encyclopedia for it) sadly seem to be
>regular fare for American readers, even though they are so unreliable
>that high school debate teams are cautioned against using them as a source,
>and undergraduates must search elsewhere for articles relevent to their
>term papers.
Me, I love fluff articles and glitzy photos, but I feel compelled to point out
that NEWSWEEK, and to a lesser extent, TIME, are generally more perceptive
in their reporting of domestic American politics than THE ECONOMIST is.
The latter magazine never "got" the appeal of Ross Perot, for example,
and its reporters have a poor grasp of the dynamics of an American
presidential campaign. (At this point, let me reiterate for the r.a.b.id
that Richard Ben Cramer's WHAT IT TAKES, which deals with the '88
presidential campaign, is a remarkably perceptive, brilliantly written
book that's well worth buying in hardback.)
As for high-school debate teams, well, I can't say that the needs of this
benighted class of American high-school students ought to say anything
about what normal, sane, and nonvicious people ought to read.
>I have to recommend good newsmagazines to my undergraduates for their
>term papers. As it stands, there is no American newsmagazine on that
>list. Quite a shame, I've always felt, that the best news about America
>comes from London.
Given what you write here, I suspect your opinion of NEWSWEEK comes
from your reading of TIME.
Mike Godwin
>I'm surprised to have seen no mention of the one US news magazine
>that is intelligent, informative, well-written, and entertaining.
>I refer, of course, to The Nation. The regular columns by, in
>particular, Christopher Hitchens, Alexander Cockburn and Edward
>Said are streets ahead of anything found in The Economist and its
>ilk.
I agree entirely in Jeremy's recommendation of THE NATION, save that
I don't regard as a "news magazine" so much as an opinion magazine.
Although THE NATION also publishes some excellent original reporting,
its mission is different from that of the newsweeklies.
Tim Szeliga
>In article <12...@optilink.UUCP> cra...@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
>
>>And even by the current definition of "conservative" in America,
>>they aren't conservative. Note their oft-expressed feelings about
>>gun prohibitionism.
>
It is a sign of the intellectual corruption of the age that the honorable term
"conservatism" can be appropriated to disguise the advocacy of a powerful,
lawless, aggressive and violent, a welfare state for the rich dedicated to
a lunatic form of Keynesian economic intervention that enhances state and
private power while mortgaging the country's future.
Noam Chomsky, 1988
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Tim Szeliga Org: National Weather Service / Hydrologic Remote Sensing
UUCP: apple!netcomsv!frost!tim Internet: t...@snow.nohrsc.nws.gov
Nick Haines
I find the Economist's analyses to be very shallow, and its
presentations badly over-simplified - it reads like it's aimed
at the intelligent sixth-former. I suppose the only reason
it is so valued in the USA is the lack of anything better.
Exactly. It competes over here with Time and Newsweek, both solid
examples of drool-proof journalism. American news media are all
enormously dumbed-down.
Nick
Mark Taranto
Francis Muir writes:
I thought that Matthew Huntbach had the Economist dead to
rights -- aimed at Six-Formers, although that description
wil pass over most Merkun heads.
. . .
Of course, their straightforward style might not appeal
to the pseudo intellectual RAB mindset.
I think that the average pseudo-intellectual r.a.b.ble is able to
comprehend the concept of a magazine being written at the six-
form level -- even if we don't know the exact age of a six-former.
To think that I've been accused of being pompous, when the very definition
of the word is living out in Palo Alto.
Mark
Mark Taranto
wwhi...@nevada.edu (MICHAEL WISE), from the English Department at UNLV writes:
> I have to recommend good newsmagazines to my undergraduates for their
> term papers. As it stands, there is no American newsmagazine on that
> list. Quite a shame, I've always felt, that the best news about America
> comes from London.
I was thinking about making a snide comment like:
As a graduate of Villanova, I wonder about Rollie
Massamino leaving a school where students in the
English Department read books to go to one where
they read magazines. (For those who don't know,
Rollie is a basketball coach who has a reputation
for choosing players who actually graduate from college).
But I'm sure there is some perfectly good reason why Michael's students
are writing term papers using "newsmagazines" instead of books.
Michael?
Mark
Chris Brewster
Yes, I have been surprised at the mindless and inordinate amount of
attention that TIMESWEEK has been getting -- as though they were the
only sources of news. ... Of the American pop weeklies, PEOPLE
magazine is the least pretentious and has rather good film reviews.
certainly their standard of writing is quite superior to TIMESWEEK.
Of course, their straightforward style might not appeal to the pseudo
intellectual RAB mindset.
Proposing People or The Nation as alternatives to the newsmagazines
somewhat misses the point, a bit like Sports Illustrated's old slogan
(aimed at potential advertisers) "the third newsmagazine". Although I
agree with the criticisms aimed at Time and Newsweek, other magazines,
good or bad, aren't intended to serve the same purpose (and they don't).
There is value in a good weekly synthesis of news, but no magazine
really delivers this anymore. Time's 3- or 4-page wrapup is pathetic;
compare it with pre-lobotomy Time to get a sense of what has happened to
the country's educational level. (And I had plenty of criticisms of
Time even back then.) The Economist doesn't fill the bill, nor does the
New York Times's "Week in Review", which concentrates on analysis and
essays rather than summarizing the actual news. The function of the
original Time mag is simply no longer being served.
Chris Brewster
c...@cray.com
Chuck Smythe
split. I tried World Monitor and found it pretty fluffy too. The Nation and
Foreign Affairs are mostly opinion journals. So can anyone suggest an American
news medium suitable for adults? I've been shopping for one for years, and
am getting discouraged.
Chuck Smythe
mike.siemon
> I'm surprised to have seen no mention of the one US news magazine
> that is intelligent, informative, well-written, and entertaining.
> I refer, of course, to The Nation.
Sigh. I *should* like _The Nation_; it far more closely matches my
own political viewpoint than most of the rest; certainly I am always
surprised when _The Economist_ takes a stance I agree with.
However, like the other American rags, _The Nation_ has the utterly
infuriating tendency to regard all positions but their own as too
vile and worthless to even consider -- the mere mouthings of idiots.
As a result, its articles are little more than smug self-congratulation
on how very good and smart *we* are as opposed to those awful others.
It is like _Forbes_ dressed in a different ideology.
_The Economist_ is often supercilious, sometimes even to the level of
_Time_, but it *will* on occasion *argue* for its positions granting
opposing views the respect of extended and competent statement (one
must put up with smug and condescending editorializing in places, but
it is not universal as it is in American newsmagazines, which seem
to have but one goal among them, defining for the readership what a
correct political attitude should be. Since I have plenty of attitude
of my own, I don't find myself in need of what they are selling.)
And the writers for _The Economist_ *do* write exceptionally well
-- the cute word plays of the headlines seem to suffice, letting
the body text be clear and careful prose making its point without
posturing. (BTW: there is a good parody by Wolcott Gibbs of the
original incarnation of Timespeak; _Time_ has toned down a lot,
but has maintained its pristine disregard for reality.)
--
Michael L. Siemon The Son of Man has come eating and drinking;
and you say "Behold, a glutton and a drunkard,
m...@usl.com a friend of tax collectors and sinners." And
standard disclaimer yet, Wisdom is justified by all her children.
Ed Suranyi
and enjoy all three of them, for different reasons?
The Economist has more of a hard news slant, and, as others have
said, it often covers international news better than the others.
But I find its articles often much too short. When I'm particularly
interested in a topic, the Economist's typical couple of columns
isn't enough for me.
When their cover stories happen to be something I'm interested in,
I love Time and Newsweek's many page long articles. For instance,
not long ago Time had a cover story on an expose of Scientology that
had me saying, "It's about time someone wrote about this in a major
magazine." Another cover story that had me in tears was Newsweek's
on the rise of anti-Semitism in Eastern Europe.
Their maps, diagrams, and charts are much better than the
ones in the Economist, usually. I'm also not ashamed to admit
that I like the color photography. For years I had only
a black and white TV set, so these newsmagazines were the
only way for me to get color pictures of the major news events.
I even like the "fluff" articles that so many of you object to.
For instance, I'm a fan of Jody Foster, so I was glad when Time
put her on the cover not long ago. A lot of the magazines are
just plain more fun than The Economist.
The Economist does tend to have better writing than Time or
Newsweek, though.
Mark Taranto
I stopped reading Time and Newsweek in the mid-80s.
My problems with these magazines do not come from their glitz, style
or political bent, but rather because they are not national news magazines.
There was a prevailing provincial attitude expressed in their articles
which indicated that they believed that if something wasn't happening
in New York, Washington or L.A, it wasn't happening.
Two incidents come to mind. In 1980, both Time and Newsweek had cover
articles on the Picasso exhibit at the Museum of Modern Art in New York.
The exhibit was considered an important one, and I did not mind it
getting the coverage. It only came to two museums. I saw the exhibit
when it opened four months earlier in Minneapolis. I wondered why it
only became newsworthy a few months later when it arrived in New York.
A few years later, two or three Catholic cardinals were installed.
Newsweek had a two or three page article on the new Cardinal from New
York. There was one paragraph on the Cardinal from Boston. There
are two reasons why this struck me as strange. While it is true that
the Cardinal from New York is considered one of the leaders in American
Catholicism, the Cardinal from Boston is also. During the 1950s & 1960s,
Cardinal Spellman (NY) and Cardinal Cushing (Boston) were both in the news
frequently. But the second reason was that the Cardinal from Boston was
a black man. I believe that he is the first black to be an American
cardinal -- and I wanted to find out more about him.
This sort of regionalism swore me off of those magazines. When I moved to
New York, I thought about resubscribing. But, then, I figured that if
I wanted New York news, I'd get the Times.
Mark
William R. Smith
I have to recommend good newsmagazines to my undergraduates for their
term papers. As it stands, there is no American newsmagazine on that
list.
Mark Taranto writes:
But I'm sure there is some perfectly good reason why Michael's students
are writing term papers using "newsmagazines" instead of books.
I don't think the English language has been confined to books just yet.
William Sburgfort Smith
Intel, SSD
Francis Muir
Francis Muir writes:
Yes, I have been surprised at the mindless and inordinate
amount of attention that TIMESWEEK has been getting -- as
though they were the only sources of news. ...
There is value in a good weekly synthesis of news, but no magazine
really delivers this anymore. The function of the original Time mag
is simply no longer being served.
Correction. The function of the original TIME magazine has been long usurped
by TV. We have no need of newsmagazines. For a decade or two LIFE was the
pinnacle of photojournalism, and when they saw the impact of TV, they wisely
folded their tent and went away -- returning, what, once a year? once a
quarter? once a month? to remind us of their once glory. So, what we need
now are journals about the news. Commentary. Analysis. The ECONOMIST at least
has recognized this rreality and is doing rather well commercially if not
much to write home about journalistically. The Brits have alwats had more
than their share of pol weeklies. Are they still around? The NEW STATESMAN?
Perhaps Jack Campin or Matthew Huntbach can fill us in. Sometimes some very
specialized technical journals like the LANCET are useful reading for their
more popular stuff.
Fido
Joel J. Hanes
c...@tamarack13.timbuk (Chris Brewster) writes:
>
> Although I
> agree with the criticisms aimed at Time and Newsweek, other magazines,
> good or bad, aren't intended to serve the same purpose (and they don't).
> There is value in a good weekly synthesis of news, but no magazine
> The Economist doesn't fill the bill, nor does the
> New York Times's "Week in Review", which concentrates on analysis and
> essays rather than summarizing the actual news. The function of the
> original Time mag is simply no longer being served.
Agreed.
(Interesting that no one has even mentioned "Insight".)
I try to read newspapers keep up, since an intelligent
news summary magazine doesn't seem to exist -- at various times,
I've tried the Christian Science Monitor, the New York Times,
the Sacramento Bee ... I grew up with the Des Moines Register,
which used to be a pretty good small-town paper.
Anyway, here in the Bay Area, I read the San Francisco Chronicle
every day, supplemented with the San Jose Mercury News on the
weekends (mostly for their Perspectives opinion section and
for the Classifieds), and I still feel hungry, particularly
for longer articles with detail and understanding.
Neither paper runs much US news, and world news coverage
is even more cursory.
What newspapers are read by members of the r.a.b.ble, and
what are their strong and weak points?
---
Joel Hanes
Francis Muir
Here in the Bay Area, I read the San Francisco Chronicle
every day, supplemented with the San Jose Mercury News on the
weekends (mostly for their Perspectives opinion section and
for the Classifieds), and I still feel hungry, particularly
for longer articles with detail and understanding.
Neither paper runs much US news, and world news coverage
is even more cursory.
I read the Chron only for my daily ration of Herb Caen; nothing else.
If I wanted to buy or sell something, I guess I'd use the Merc.
What newspapers are read by members of the r.a.b.ble, and
what are their strong and weak points?
Many years Down South endeared me to the Los Angeles Times, and I still read it.
A well-balanced, general-purpose newspaper with some great writers. Personally,
I find their Foreign Correspondents better informed than the NYT. Still in the
same family after many, many years, and it shews. No upstart Oztralian owner
here.
Fido
Chris Brewster
... The function of the original TIME magazine has been long usurped
by TV. We have no need of newsmagazines. ...
I think this overestimates TV and underestimates the quality of the
newsmagazines in their original incarnations. Sure, they could be slick
or slanted, but they could also provide a good wrap-up of major
developments, from a (slightly!) longer perspective than that of a daily
paper. For example, an ongoing story such as a peace conference or
international blow-up can be difficult to follow from daily accounts,
especially if you're busy that week, on vacation, or whatever. I've
often caught up with such stories by reading a magazine account later.
But there's no really good source of such summaries now. Take a look at
old Times from the 50s or 60s; you'll find you can get a sense of what
was happening at a given time. Whatever misconceptions or biases they
show were undoubtedly true of other media of the time. Time is now
trying to recast itself as some kind of feature magazine, which is much
less useful.
Chris Brewster
c...@cray.com
Mike Godwin
>To think that I've been accused of being pompous, when the very definition
>of the word is living out in Palo Alto.
I disagree. "The very definition of the word" lives here in r.a.b.
True, Francis Muir lives in Palo Alto (or thereabouts), but I'd be
cautious about assuming that the Palo Alto Francis Muir is
identical to "Fido," "Philomath," "Francis Muir," and other personae
who visit rec.arts.books.
Mike Godwin
>However, like the other American rags, _The Nation_ has the utterly
>infuriating tendency to regard all positions but their own as too
>vile and worthless to even consider -- the mere mouthings of idiots.
One exception to this generally correct generalization: THE NEW REPUBLIC.
Ostensibly a politically liberal journal (except on Israel), it often
publishes articles by conservative writers. TNR articles critical of
conservative opinion generally do not begin by assuming that conservatives
are "idiots"--they instead try to refute the conservatives' arguments
on their merits. Such as they are.
Chris Brewster
What newspapers are read by members of the r.a.b.ble, and
what are their strong and weak points?
For better or worse, there's really no substitute for the New York
Times. Its foibles and failings are all too obvious (as described in
amusing detail in SPY magazine), but no other publication is even
competing in the same league. A few years back the LA Times provided an
excellent and quite different alternative, but I've heard it has gone
Lite along with everyone else (even Scientific American!). The NY Times
is available in many parts of the country--I get same-day home delivery
in a Minneapolis suburb--and it's well worth the price if you want to be
in touch. (I can't believe I'm sounding like such a promoter, because I
can get quite impatient with The House that Puck Built :-).
Chris Brewster
c...@cray.com
Francis Muir
Mark Taranto writes:
To think that I've been accused of being pompous, when the
very definition of the word is living out in Palo Alto.
I disagree. "The very definition of the word" lives here in r.a.b.
True, Francis Muir lives in Palo Alto (or thereabouts), but I'd be
cautious about assuming that the Palo Alto Francis Muir is
identical to "Fido," "Philomath," "Francis Muir," and other personae
who visit rec.arts.books.
In fact I am more like Deus X Machina, if you get my drift. Perhaps a little
deconstruction is in order. "Living out in Palo Alto"? Did Markie once cox
the Princeton Eight? Out in, out in,.... Now. More seriously. I can see how a
person can define something. "Muir defines pomposity" I could understand if
not appreciate. But "Muir is the definition of pomposity"? Does this make sense
even in NY? Oh yes. Its Redwood City, not palo Alto. I left PA when I heard
natives pronounce Cowper street as COWper street. Perleeeeese.
Arf arf
Fido
Steven M Casburn
However, like the other American rags, _The Nation_ has the utterly
infuriating tendency to regard all positions but their own as too
vile and worthless to even consider -- the mere mouthings of idiots.
Mike Godwin replies:
One exception to this generally correct generalization: THE NEW REPUBLIC.
Oh, wow. I've got to disagree strongly on this one. I've subscribed to TNR for
two years and, though it is true that the editors do bring a slight variety of
opinion, it isn't nearly as diverse as they try to make it seem.
The biggest case in point is TNR's Middle Eastern coverage. Correct me if I'm
wrong, but has TNR ever run an article even *mildly* critical of Israel's
policy in the West Bank? I have a hard time stomaching the endless pro-Israel
bias. It truly is annoying.
On the other hand, Mike Kinsley usually does a great job in bringing logic to
bear on arguments he disagrees with. So, no, TNR isn't all bad. But I wouldn't
extol it as a model for others to follow, either. I'll be letting my
subscription run out in October so I can afford to re-subscribe to The
Economist.
Steve (scas...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu)
--
Steve Casburn (scas...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu)
*The* Ohio State University
Crawford Kilian
right. When he says "Their coverage of Florida's 1987 revisions...were severely
in error..." he commits a pretty obvious subject-verb disagreement. I realize
that online composition makes it easy to slip up, but when one is assuming the
Mantle of Superiority one had better make sure it covers one's bare
backside...not to mention one's holster and capgun.
Mark Taranto
mnem...@eff.org (Mike Godwin) writes:
> mtar...@shearson.com (Mark Taranto) writes:
>> To think that I've been accused of being pompous, when the very definition
>> of the word is living out in Palo Alto.
> I disagree. "The very definition of the word" lives here in r.a.b.
> True, Francis Muir lives in Palo Alto (or thereabouts), but I'd be
> cautious about assuming that the Palo Alto Francis Muir is
> identical to "Fido," "Philomath," "Francis Muir," and other personae
> who visit rec.arts.books.
Mike, of course is right -- however this pompous persona does seem to post
from the Palo Alto area.
Of course, I often enjoy it -- even at its most pompous.
Mark
Mike Godwin
>The biggest case in point is TNR's Middle Eastern coverage. Correct me if I'm
>wrong, but has TNR ever run an article even *mildly* critical of Israel's
>policy in the West Bank? I have a hard time stomaching the endless pro-Israel
>bias. It truly is annoying.
I alluded in my earlier post to TNR's Israel stance. I wasn't clear on this,
but one should take my generalizations about THE NEW REPUBLIC to apply
to the magazine's coverage of areas other than Israel and the Middle East.
Even so, TNR does occasionally criticize Israel--it's just that Martin
Peretz is guaranteed to overcompensate in his own editorializing for any
such criticism. And Peretz publishes TNR.
>On the other hand, Mike Kinsley usually does a great job in bringing logic to
>bear on arguments he disagrees with. So, no, TNR isn't all bad. But I wouldn't
>extol it as a model for others to follow, either.
With the exception of its Israel coverage (with which I often agree, by
the way, but which is nonetheless heavily biased pro-Israel), TNR is,
IMHO, a very good model for opinion journals.
Emma Pease
>Mike, of course is right -- however this pompous persona does seem to post
>from the Palo Alto area.
This is true only in a general sense. Stanford, where Francis works
and posts, is not in Palo Alto despite the errors stating it is in
many newsmagazines and newspapers. Nor does Palo Alto claim Stanford;
Palo Alto does not allow mere Stanford residents to step on the
hallowed grounds of Foothill Park, that is restricted to Palo Alto
residents.
I am surprised that Fido did not castigate Palo Alto for closing its
harbor after all I suspect that Redwood residents are just as likely
to mispronounce Cowper (or Berkeley) as Palo Alto residents, but, at
least they haven't closed their harbor.
Emma
ps. I am not sure whether the Economist is guilty of writing "Stanford
University in Palo Alto", but, I suspect it is.
Francis Muir
Mark Taranto writes:
Mike, of course is right -- however this pompous
persona does seem to post from the Palo Alto area.
Markie does it again. there is no "Palo Alto area". There is a Bay Area,
but that is it by way of areas.
I am surprised that Fido did not castigate Palo Alto for closing
its harbor after all I suspect that Redwood residents are just as
likely to mispronounce Cowper (or Berkeley) as Palo Alto residents,
but, at least they haven't closed their harbor.
No Cowpers in RC, luv. No namby-pamby fawning after the literati. RC has
strong names. 5th Ave. Madison Ave. Jefferson. Roosevelt. My own, Cleveland,
is one block away from a bit of prescience; Clinton. We sport our Perot
bumper stickers with pride. We have four harbors! Dockland, Pete's,
Peninsula, and the Port of Redwood City whereat is stacked a mammoth pile
of salt and an even larger pile of powdered Chevvies.
Fido
Jeff Meyer
discovered it several years ago, after several failed attempts at finding an
American weekly news magazine that provided more information than opinion
(e.g., THE NEW REPUBLIC, US WORLD AND NEWS REPORT, etc.) While THE
ECONOMIST isn't pure as snow in the objectivity department, they come pretty
close in human terms; more importantly, they *are* awfully good at showing
arguments on either side of an issue, and they really do seem to put more
emphasis on giving you the facts first and their views second.
Plus, the writing is nothing less than a delight to read. (My hearty
congratulations to whoever captions their photos. I've gotten more laughs
from that than any other source over the last few years, I think.)
Other good reasons to read it:
The best international coverage I've seen in an English-language
magazine. Bar-freaking-none.
A good sense of humor. (No, make that a *great* sense of humor. Heavy
on the wry.)
The only news magazine with a science section that manages to explain
the issues and details to an intelligent layman without descending
to TIME or NEWSWEEK's "here's Mr. Neutrino" gurglings.
Yeah, it's as expensive as a magazine gets, but I've gotten it for four
years now, and I intend to keep on subscribing for another four years.
Thank God journalism still flourishes *somewhere*.
"Watching Mrs. Thatcher's performance from my
living room in America brought home (literally)
how impossible it is to imagine President George
Bush, or any leading American politician, uttering
such an obvious but unpleasant truth so
forthrightly. Whatever happens to Mr. Bush, he
will never have the problems Mrs. Thatcher is now
going through, which stem from ideological hubris.
She knows what she believes and is willing to
pursue it past the point of either good sense or
political prudence. Mr. Bush believes in very
little."
-- Michael Kinsley, THE ECONOMIST
Moriarty, aka Jeff Meyer
INTERNET: mori...@tc.fluke.COM
Manual UUCP: {uunet, uw-beaver, sun, microsoft}!fluke!moriarty
CREDO: You gotta be Cruel to be Kind...
**>> Keep circulating the tapes <<**
Clayton Cramer
> In article <1992Sep1.0...@morrow.stanford.edu>, fra...@oas.stanford.edu (Francis Muir) writes:
> > The Economist does not operate under American definitions, it is a
> > British institution. In Great Britain there is nothing conservative about
>
> Completely agreed.
>
> > a pro-gun position. There has never been a time in british history when
>
> It was always a Whig position. Read some Sydney Harrington.
Whoops! James Harrington, not Sydney Harrington. Somehow, James
Harrington, Algernon Sidney, and John Trenchard all merged together
into SuperWhig! for a brief moment in my brain.
--
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer My opinions, all mine!
Alcohol prohibition didn't work; drug prohibition doesn't work; gun
prohibition won't work.
Clayton Cramer
>
> Francis Muir writes:
>
> As for the Economist, it should be pointed out that
> while they are conservative, they are not Conservative.
>
> And even by the current definition of "conservative" in America,
> they aren't conservative. Note their oft-expressed feelings about
> gun prohibitionism.
>
> The Economist does not operate under American definitions, it is a
> British institution. In Great Britain there is nothing conservative about
Completely agreed.
> a pro-gun position. There has never been a time in british history when
It was always a Whig position. Read some Sydney Harrington.
> owning weapons has been anything but the prerogative of the Armed Forces.
> The sole exception has always been hunting weapons.
>
> Fido
Utterly false. Until the Pistols Act of 1920, gun ownership was
nearly unregulated in Britain. Until the 1870s, there was not
even a licensing requirement for carrying concealed handguns in
Britain.
Oh yes, the Bill of Rights of 1689 (statutory in nature, and
therefore overriden by later laws):
7. That the subjects which are protestants, may have
arms for their defence suitable to their conditions,
and as allowed by law.
John McCarthy
> owning weapons has been anything but the prerogative of the Armed Forces.
> The sole exception has always been hunting weapons.
>
> Fido
As usual Cramer has the detailed facts. I was, and still am, willing
to bet Francis $50 that he was mistaken purely on the basis of my
reading of British detective stories. No gentleman was ever
bothered about owning a weapon in such a story.
--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.
Larry Hammer
>The Economist, whatever its politics (and I find its confident tone sometimes
>absurd), has aimed for a market of educated, literate readers who want
>information rather than glitzy layouts and color photographs. While it's
>expensive compared to the US and Canadian newsweeklies, on a per-fact basis
>it's the best bargain around.
What He Said.
Larry "Echo of the Net" Hammer
(yeah, but to whose Narcisis?)
--
L...@albert.physics.arizona.edu \ "One like a wombat prowled obtuse
The insane don't need disclaimers \ and furry" --Christina Rossetti
Mark Brader
> examples of drool-proof journalism.
In my opinion, as a regular reader of Newsweek and an occasional reader
of Time, this complaint is grossly exaggerated.
--
Mark Brader "Bad news disturbs his game; so does good;
SoftQuad Inc., Toronto so also does the absence of news."
utzoo!sq!msb, m...@sq.com -- Stephen Leacock
This article is in the public domain.
Francis Muir
I was surprised to read about Britain:
owning weapons has been anything but the prerogative
of the Armed Forces. The sole exception has always
been hunting weapons.
Fido
As usual Cramer has the detailed facts. I was, and still am,
willing to bet Francis $50 that he was mistaken purely on the
basis of my reading of British detective stories. No gentleman
was ever bothered about owning a weapon in such a story.
I'm not quite sure I understand the terms of John's wager, so I'll decline
-- although the $50 would come in handy. Unlike Clayton Cramer and, say,
Mike Godwin, for the purposes of rec.arts.books I do not live in a factual
world. My world is perceived. Opinionated. I have made the point before,
and Mike has come to understood this. There is nothing unique in my position.
It is a trick I may have picked up from the Oxford Union, where sides to a
debate are more or less decided by the President, not the persons who are
to be involved in the debate. It does seem to be a uniquely British modus,
and can also be seen in the way the Criminal Justice system works in the
UK. Rumpole rarely has a passionate belief in the innocence of his clients.
What he has is something more important: a belief in the right of the
accused, however lowly, to a good defence.
Fido
William R. Smith
This is true only in a general sense. Stanford, where Francis works
and posts, is not in Palo Alto despite the errors stating it is in
many newsmagazines and newspapers.
What, is Stanford an entity unto itself, like the Vatican? I always
thought it was in Palo Alto. Get you get sanctuary on the Stanford
campus?
Mark Taranto
<wis...@amelia.nas.nasa.gov (William R. Smith)> AKA
> Mark Taranto writes:
Not yet -- but many English departments only teach courses in Literature,
Language (e.g., Grammar & Linguistics) and writing. When I was at
Villanova, even the writing classes were also literature classes.
I know that there are composition classes at some universities
which are JUST writing classes, and I imagine that there are others
where Journalism or Communications are folded into the English
Department.
I wrote e-mail to Michael, when I posted it, explaining that the snide
comment was just a joke, but that I was curious as to why he was using
magazines.
Mark
Dan O'Connell [CONTRACTOR]
Anyway, here in the Bay Area, I read the San Francisco Chronicle
every day, supplemented with the San Jose Mercury News on the
weekends (mostly for their Perspectives opinion section and
for the Classifieds), and I still feel hungry, particularly
for longer articles with detail and understanding.
Neither paper runs much US news, and world news coverage
is even more cursory.
I too have had to make do with the Merc who seem to get
more than half their stuff from other papers.
IMO, there is really only one worthwhile newspaper:
the Washington Post. The NY Times is okay, but hey!
no comics. Once you get on a diet of the Post, everything
else leaves you hungry.
I get the WP Book World mailed to me out here in Santa
Cruz and it arrives about 3 weeks after the published
date. Invariably, a week or two later one or more of
the book reviews will show up in the Merc, sometimes
without the attribution that it was first published
in the WP.
The other paper I like is the Int'l Herald Tribune,
which is mainly the WP and the NY Times recycled
as an english-language paper distributed overseas.
Dano
Francis Muir
Emma Pease writes:
This is true only in a general sense. Stanford, where
Francis works and posts, ...
Correction. Francis works at Stanford but Fido posts from Redwood City.
... is not in Palo Alto despite the errors stating it is
in many newsmagazines and newspapers.
What, is Stanford an entity unto itself, like the Vatican? I always
thought it was in Palo Alto. Get you get sanctuary on the Stanford
campus?
Indeed. An entity unto itself. Erehwon. Sanctuary at Snodfart? Good heavens
no. You must be thinking of the enclave known as the Hoover Institute. Here
several persons have been holed up for several years, resisting all attempts
to get them to recant their Political Incorrectitude. For taxation purposes
we are a Farm, and Law & Order are provided by the Sheriff of the County of
Santa Clara. Think of us as Robin Hood and his Merrie Men.
Fido
John McCarthy
John McCarthy writes:
Fido
Fido
Ah, I am beginning to understand why Clayton Cramer ought not to be
allowed to post to rec.arts.books. The gall of the man, bringing
into a recreational group concerned with books what actual laws
were passed about guns in Britain in 1870 and 1921.
Joann Zimmerman
>I read the Chron only for my daily ration of Herb Caen; nothing else.
>If I wanted to buy or sell something, I guess I'd use the Merc.
When I was resident in those parts, I read both the Chron and the
Smerc; when I was looking for financial and technical stuff, or
progress reports on the latest reworking of 101 between Palo Alto and
San Jose, the Smerc was invaluable, but if I wanted cultural news
(opera reviews, art openings, obscure film screenings) I had to look
to the Chron. Neither of them seemed to be truly amazing on foreign
and national news, to my mind.
> What newspapers are read by members of the r.a.b.ble, and
> what are their strong and weak points?
I now read the New York Times, the local fishwrap and the daily campus
paper. I can count on the Times to be considerably more completist
than anything else available near campus; unfortunately this also
applies to their typo level, which appears to have increased
exponentially over the last 3 years. I find their editorial and OpEd
balance to be, well, *interesting*; I agree with about half and
disagree violently with the other half, which suggests either that I
have extreme views or they are being well-balanced, or maybe both.
The local paper (_Austin American-Statesman_, generally known as the
_RealEstatesman_ or the _SpaceCase_) is notable chiefly for its
consistency in underestimating the intelligence of its readers; given
a university community of 60,000 students, faculty and staff, as well
as a large state governmental presence, I would, in the best of all
possible worlds (and perhaps even in some less blessed) expect a
higher level of analysis and reporting. (Actually it shows recent
signs of occasional improvement, but I argue from long experience.)
NYT articles are reprinted therein, but almost always in an abridged
fashion - sometimes so much so as to render the result nonsensical.
The campus paper is *highly* variable on a yearly basis, depending on
what political cabal has taken control of the editorship. The most
recent bunch makes me wonder if they passed any of the required
journalism courses.
--
"[Fiction's] function is not to detail the actual world, but to create
a parallel one. Image by image, phrase by phrase, through artifice and
evocation it must then make that world at once credible and meaningful."
-- Robert Stone ...!cs.utexas.edu!ccwf.cc.utexas.edu!jzimm
Joann Zimmerman
>Francis Muir writes:
[stuff, to which Mark takes exception]
>To think that I've been accused of being pompous, when the very definition
>of the word is living out in Palo Alto.
I'm having trouble parsing this; does it refer to Francis in
particular, or to residents of Palo Alto in general? I'm rather
worried because I must confess to having lived there for over seven
years, before I seen the light. My own take on residents of P.A. is
"self-satisfied," not "pompous" - and I can plead guilty as charged to
that one on occasion. But also civically-satisfied - and to see why,
just look at the PaloAlto/MenloPark section of the San Francisco
Bookstore list!
Gerard Fryer
|> > [The Economist] competes over here with Time and Newsweek, both solid
|> > examples of drool-proof journalism.
|>
|> In my opinion, as a regular reader of Newsweek and an occasional reader
|> of Time, this complaint is grossly exaggerated.
Someone writing on this thread observed that the Economist is aimed at
a mere sixth form reading and comprehension ability. Well that's
better than the competition. By their own admission Time and Newsweek
are aimed at about ninth grade (i.e., third form). I have to buy Time
for general news mainly because Hawaii has no newspapers worthy of the
name, but it often makes me seeth: shallow writing, fuzzy ideas, TV in
print. Fortunately both the Economist and the Guardian Weekly are in
the library.
--
Gerard Fryer (g.f...@soest.hawaii.edu)
School of Ocean & Earth Science & Technology
University of Hawaii at Manoa
Don McGregor
scas...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Steven M Casburn) writes:
> However, like the other American rags, _The Nation_ has the utterly
> infuriating tendency to regard all positions but their own as too
> vile and worthless to even consider -- the mere mouthings of idiots.
>
> Mike Godwin replies:
>One exception to this generally correct generalization: THE NEW REPUBLIC.
>
_Commentary_ often has a very lively letters to the editor section.
Correspondents are not edited down to a few pithy lines, and the article's
authors don't always "win." Real blows are landed. In other mags I
always get the impression that letters are just a pro forma exercise--if a
correspondent disagrees with the magazine he gets a few sentences that
either make him look like a mouth-breather or are artfully refuted by the
editor. It's kind of like Usenet in that way. They get to pick what they
respond to.
I haven't read TIMEWEEK in years (as opposed to looking at the pretty
pictures now and then) but as I recall they were especially good at the
"refutation by only letting idiots speak for the opposition" tactic.
TNR actually works pretty well as a news magazine. If you catch a
newspaper or three a week and listen to the news during the morning
commute you usually have enough background to pick up on what's going on.
Any long-running story in the papers gets repetitive after the first few
days anyway.
----
Don McGregor
d...@esl.com
Clayton Cramer
> I'm surprised to have seen no mention of the one US news magazine
> that is intelligent, informative, well-written, and entertaining.
> I refer, of course, to The Nation. The regular columns by, in
> particular, Christopher Hitchens, Alexander Cockburn and Edward
> Said are streets ahead of anything found in The Economist and its
> ilk.
>
> -Jeremy Henderson | Une souris verte
Perhaps it's a matter of definition, but I don't think of _The
Nation_ as a newsmagazine, but a journal of political opinion,
like _National Review_, _Reason_, _New Republic_. The strength
of such magazines isn't current news coverage, but analysis
(to the extent that ideology doesn't screw it up, as it usually
does).
Clayton Cramer
> In article <12...@optilink.UUCP> cra...@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
# #And even by the current definition of "conservative" in America,
# #they aren't conservative. Note their oft-expressed feelings about
# #gun prohibitionism.
#
# I feel compelled to point out that Great Britain has no Second Amendment.
# Few American conservatives would regard, say, Margaret Thatcher as a
# liberal if she favored gun control measures (as I feel certain she does).
#
# Mike Godwin, |"The meeting of two personalities is like the contact
American conservatives aren't hostile to gun control because of the Second
Amendment -- and that hostility is in fact quite recently developed.
Clayton Cramer
> In article <1992Sep1.1...@eff.org> mnem...@eff.org (Mike Godwin) writes:
> >In article <12...@optilink.UUCP> cra...@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
# ##they aren't conservative. Note their oft-expressed feelings about
# ##gun prohibitionism.
#
# It is a sign of the intellectual corruption of the age that the honorable term
# "conservatism" can be appropriated to disguise the advocacy of a powerful,
# lawless, aggressive and violent, a welfare state for the rich dedicated to
# a lunatic form of Keynesian economic intervention that enhances state and
# private power while mortgaging the country's future.
# Noam Chomsky, 1988
#
# ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
# Tim Szeliga Org: National Weather Service / Hydrologic Remote Sensing
Very true. But keep in mind that most conservatives (I've met a
few, they aren't yet extinct) regard Bush as a liberal, and
Reagan as questionable.
Clayton Cramer
Mantle of Superiority? Well, if I got paid for my USENET postings,
I would probably put more effort into "online composition." I
reserve that for articles and books for which I get paid.
Clayton Cramer
> I seem to be the only person so far posting to this topic who lives
> in, or at least who will admit to living in, Palo Alto, and I don't see
> what all this fuss is about. We Palo Altans have never considered
> ourselves to be above the common people. Indeed, it is an article of
> faith with us that we should treat those who aren't fortunate enough to
> live here exactly as if they were our equals.
Except when desiring to enter a public park owned by the City of
Palo Alto. Of course, race has nothing to do with the policy,
oh no. :-)
Charles Packer
Times Dynasty Biography", reported the announcement by Little,
Brown that it would publish "the first comprehensive biography
of the Ochs-Sulzberger family," who control the Times. Its
authors will be Susan Tifft and Alex Jones, who have already
written a book about the Bingham family of the Louisville Times,
"The Patriarch".
The positioning of the article (in the NYC/East Coast edition,
at least) is interesting, because its an instance of
meta-organization that is unique to the Times. It appeared at
the bottom of a conceptual funnel. Above it were two stories
about Bobby Fischer,
Fischer's 20-Year Silence Ends in Outburst of Rancor
What's Next? Emotion Runs High
At the top of the facing page, a continuation of a story about a
German movie director, Hans Jurgen Syberberg, who has emerged
after 10 years of absence from filmaking:
An Elusive Director In Another Entrance
Next to the Times item on the facing page, a continuation of a
story about Garth Brooks, the reigning country music heavy.
Tracing the Brooks and Syberberg stories back to the front page
of the Arts section, we see it also contains s story headlined
Networks Intensify The Courtship of David Letterman
and one about a new oratorio -- the headline is what's relevant here:
A New Jeremiah in Jerusalem? Don't Despair
In other words, a sudden concentration of material emphasizing
two things. First, individuals who are "heavies", in movies, pop
music, TV, chess, and Biblical lore. Indeed, the story about
Brooks calls him "the 900 pound gorilla" of the record industry.
Second, there is a consistent tone of expectancy, newness,
change. The Brooks headline is "Seizing a Chance To Make
Changes."
What does it mean? Like poetry, it's subject to interpretation.
At any rate, it's these coalescences, only partly due to chance
(the Fischer stories are the only ones generated by breaking
events -- the others could have been run any time) that make the
Times interesting to me, rather than "comprehensive foreign
policy news" or some other conventional standard of regard.
Alayne McGregor and Brett Delmage
>>I'm surprised to have seen no mention of the one US news magazine
>>that is intelligent, informative, well-written, and entertaining.
>>I refer, of course, to The Nation. The regular columns by, in
>>particular, Christopher Hitchens, Alexander Cockburn and Edward
>>Said are streets ahead of anything found in The Economist and its
>>ilk.
>
>I don't regard as a "news magazine" so much as an opinion magazine.
>Although THE NATION also publishes some excellent original reporting,
>its mission is different from that of the newsweeklies.
Perhaps _In These Times_ is nearer to what r.a.b readers want in an alternative
newsmagazine, although, of course, it does not pretend to be objective.
My favourite U.S. political magazine is, however, _The Progressive_, which
inevitably produces several interesting articles each issue, plus Molly
Ivins' columns and "No Comment". And, if one goes by the virulent debate in
its letters columns, it hardly sticks to one party line.
Alayne McGregor
ala...@ve3pak.ocunix.on.ca
John McCarthy
I welcome this opportunity to disagree with Clayton Cramer, since I
usually agree with him. The park in question is Foothills Park,
the land for which was donated to Palo Alto by Dr. Russell Lee, the
founder of the Palo Alto Medical Clinic. To use the land for a park
it had to be developed at considerable expense. When this expense
was determined, the City of Palo Alto asked neighboring cities
and possibly neighboring counties whether they wanted to participate.
When none did, the park was reserved for Palo Alto residents. None
of the other Palo Alto parks has any restriction. By the way,
Stanford University, where I live, was also one of the entities that
declined to participate in the development of the park.
I think we deserve what we got.
By the way one of the incidental expenses of developing Foothill
Park was making sure it was entirely clear of land mines. Dr. Lee's
well known public spirit had extended during the Korean War to allowing
SRI to test the use of dogs there for finding nonmetallic land mines.
SRI was very sure that all had been removed, and indeed none were found.
MICHAEL WISE
spelled that wrong, Mark. I deleted my lines before double-checking) in
response to his post. I was going to post a reply, but got bogged down
with semester beginnings: "To answer your question, which
I will answer again on the net, the news mags are used as a tool for the
research paper in English 102. That gets students moving towards the
periodicals section of the library, where the most current information
(on literature and other topics) resides. Books can often be devilishly
out of date or hard to get a hold of while they're still new. Periodicals
give good scholars a leg uon the latest research, because before it
appears as a book, it always appears as an article in a journal. But
102 students don't have anything to do with that; they just need good
information on a topic they're interested in, which means something
current. The best place to find that is in periodicals, and the best
current affairs magazine--one that argues a point the way I'd like to
see my students argue a point--is The Economist."
Furthermore, 102 students also study literature--the class is a bastard-
ization of composition and literature. Although the people in this news
group are all interested in reading literature, how many of you would
like to write an imitation of the Modest Proposal by Swift? Wouldn't
it also be difficult to write a stylistic analysis of The Rape of the
Lock? You see, the emphasis of the class is writing, and everything
needs to be geared to that. What's more, those of us with a good ed-
ucational background end up skipping 102, which is a minimum require-
ment in writing and humanistic instruction set up by the school. The
students don't need seventeenth century poetry; they need contemporary
prose. I'm not saying they're too dumb to educate, just that they need
to get excited about English, rather than exasperated with it.
But I'm getting away from my point. The only newsmagazine I have ever
read that can be regarded as having consistently fine, articulate, in-
telligent contemporary prose is THE ECONOMIST! I feel very strongly about
this because I lived in Taiwan trying to make a living fishing stories
out of the world news services and The Economist saved me on countless
occasions. The depth of the writing and the coverage is far beyond Timeweek
& World Report. There is no basis for comparison.
Michael Wise
JHenderson
=>> I'm surprised to have seen no mention of the one US news magazine
=>> that is intelligent, informative, well-written, and entertaining.
=>> I refer, of course, to The Nation. The regular columns by, in
=>> particular, Christopher Hitchens, Alexander Cockburn and Edward
=>> Said are streets ahead of anything found in The Economist and its
=>> ilk.
=>Perhaps it's a matter of definition, but I don't think of _The
=>Nation_ as a newsmagazine, but a journal of political opinion,
=>like _National Review_, _Reason_, _New Republic_. The strength
=>of such magazines isn't current news coverage, but analysis
=>(to the extent that ideology doesn't screw it up, as it usually
=>does).
I agree with you (and Mike G) up to a point, but the advantage of
The Nation_as_a_news_magazine is that it prints stories that Time
and co. find too politically uncomfortable, for example the story of
Reagan pre-election deals with the Iranians was running in The Nation
ages before any of the mainstream newsmags thought of printing it.
Also, any news magazine is bound to be analytical, if only in the choice
of "news" it chooses to print. I find The Nation's analysis more
convincing than that of other periodicals.
On a different note, Francis, the only thing I picked up at the
Oxford Union was a powerful desire to emigrate!!
--
==================================================================
-Jeremy Henderson | Une souris verte
egp...@castle.ed.ac.uk | Qui courrait dans l'herbe
==================================================================
Francis Muir
... the City of Palo Alto asked neighboring cities and
possibly neighboring counties whether they wanted to
participate. When none did, the park was reserved for
Palo Alto residents. None of the other Palo Alto parks
has any restriction. By the way, Stanford University,
where I live, was also one of the entities that declined
to participate in the development of the park.
I think we deserve what we got.
Surely the point is, did we not deserve what we did not get?
By the way one of the incidental expenses of developing
Foothill Park was making sure it was entirely clear of
land mines. Dr. Lee's well known public spirit had extended
during the Korean War to allowing SRI to test the use of
dogs there for finding nonmetallic land mines.
SRI was very sure that all had been removed, and indeed
none were found.
Is this all the mines, or all the dogs? Were the dogs selected on the
basis of their refusal to do arithmetic? SRI was then the Stanford
Research Institute, and an integral part of the University. It is
curious that Dr. Lee would allow Stanford's dogs but not Stanford's
sapient featherless bipeds on to his earthy mound. Did the Farm also
have grazing rights?
Fido
I am His Highness'
Dog at Kew.
Pray tell me, Sir,
Whose Dog are you?
Francis Muir
On a different note, Francis, the only thing I picked up at the
Oxford Union was a powerful desire to emigrate!!
And here you are, back in Scotland. I am a Life Member, and one of these
days I'll drop in there again. During WWII they elected an Austrian, Rudi
Weissweiler, as President, and it seemed like a noble sentiment at a time
when the Nahzees (Churchillian pronunciation) were the bad guys. Rudi
had an Open house every Wednesday evening, and kept it up for twenty years
after he left Oxford. The great thing about his Open House was that it was
truly that. There was no standard for admission. An extraordinarily eclectic
bunch would turn up. I recommend the idea to anyone interested in advancing
ideas.
The Dining Room service was the best in Oxford. Still is?
Fido
Francis Muir
Gerard Fryer writes:
Someone writing on this thread observed that the
Economist is aimed at a mere sixth form reading and
comprehension ability.
In terms of reading age there are _very_ few weeklies which
aim higher than sixth form reading age. For a general readership
weekly that is a very high standard. It's a lot higher than
the net!
I suspected that Sixth Form Standard would be misunderstood. In a
general sense there is no higher standard than SF. If things have not
changed, it is the Open Scholarship standard, and I can imagine none
higher. Persons may go on to be more learned, but they'll never be
any brighter. As an aside, at my school, Stonyhurst, we had no numerical
scheme but a Pavonian one reflecting the early origins of the place:
Elements
Rudiments
Grammar
Syntax
Rhetoric
I may have left one out... Are masters stil crazed? We had one, "Bolshie"
Ryan, who taught French. 6'6". Shaven head. Full set of badly fitting
false teeth. Loved Verlaine, but had a foul temper. Was supposed to have
killed a man in the boxing ring...
Fido
Little Latin
Less Greek
Nick Haines
Someone writing on this thread observed that the Economist is aimed at
a mere sixth form reading and comprehension ability. Well that's
better than the competition. By their own admission Time and Newsweek
are aimed at about ninth grade (i.e., third form).
Like I said, drool-proof. Aimed at the _average_ 13-year-old, who
can't form sentences of more than 10 words, or read sentences of more
than 15, and would rather be playing Nintendo but will sit still if
you give him glossy colour pictures. The Economist is genuinely better
(though still terribly simplistic); there are very few news magazines
aimed at the genuinely educated.
In fact, are there any?
Nick
William R. Smith
By their own admission Time and Newsweek
are aimed at about ninth grade (i.e., third form).
Could someone relate the U.S. school grades to British forms?
U.S.
pre-school
kindergarten (usually age 5)
grades 1 - 6 (usually advancing a grade each year)
grades 7 - 8 (also called junior high or middle school)
grades 9 - 12 (usually called high school)
college or university (designed for 4 years, but now often taking
5 years to get a bachelor degree)
2 year colleges are often called junior colleges or community colleges
students sometimes transfer after junior college
to a 4 year college
beyond 4 year college is graduate school
Katherine M. Catmull
>The local paper (_Austin American-Statesman_, generally known as the
>_RealEstatesman_ or the _SpaceCase_) is notable chiefly for its
>consistency in underestimating the intelligence of its readers;
>
. . . and its maniacally enthusiastic support of local Chamber
of Commerce booster projects--thus the Austin Real Estatesman.
Local arts, howver, which flourish wildly, especially the music,
dance, and theater scenes, are for the most part ignored in
favor of one more interview with a sitcom star.
The local alternative rag, the Austin Chronicle, has its moments.
Kate
--
- - - - - - - -
ka...@cactus.org
Be the voice of night and Florida in my ear.
Till Poser - ZEUS OFFLINE
|>ger...@caliban.soest.hawaii.edu (Gerard Fryer) writes:
|> By their own admission Time and Newsweek
|> are aimed at about ninth grade (i.e., third form).
In article <NICKH.92S...@VOILA.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU>,
ni...@CS.CMU.EDU (Nick Haines) writes in soc.culture.britain:
|> The Economist is genuinely better
|>(though still terribly simplistic); there are very few news magazines
|>aimed at the genuinely educated.
|>
|>In fact, are there any?
Arguably "Der Spiegel", but not being in English probably puts him out of
the competition. One could make a case for "TransAtlantik", another German
magazine, but I wonder whether it would fit into the "news magazine"
cathegory.
I, personally, like the Economist, since it doesn't make any effort to be
really "glossy" and "au courant". However, for my taste the articles tend
to be a bit on the short side. They could do more in depth coverage.
|>Nick
Till Poser Internet: po...@vxdsyc.desy.de
-F35- ZEUS DESY/Freiburg Bitnet: POSER@DESYVAX
bldg.1b-235, Notkestr.85 Hepnet: VXDESY::POSER (13313::Poser)
D-2000 Hamburg 52 Tel.: -49-40-8998-2004
Holly Silva
[Haines, in reference to Newsweek, Time, possibly inclusive of The Economist]
>Like I said, drool-proof. Aimed at the _average_ 13-year-old, who
>can't form sentences of more than 10 words, or read sentences of more
>than 15, and would rather be playing Nintendo but will sit still if
>you give him glossy colour pictures. The Economist is genuinely better
>(though still terribly simplistic); there are very few news magazines
>aimed at the genuinely educated.
>
>In fact, are there any?
>
Nevada. They put me up at a small, local motel which had three issues of
the Atlantic Monthly lying on the lobby coffee table, together with an
assortment of Businessweeks, and Sports Illustrateds. If I can manage
to find a readable, informative magazine like the Atlantic Monthly lying
on a coffee table in a small, mining town motel in East Bumfuck, Nevada
you should by now have managed to aquire a few subscriptions to readable,
informative publications at Carnegie-Mellon. Even if you have to rely on
their extensive libraries. The material is out there and available to you,
if you'd trouble to turn off your computer and walk to it.
Among American publications, both the New Republic and the Atlantic
Monthly fit the 'stringent' qualifications you seem to require. They both
target a highly educated, mildly left-of-center audience. And if I can
receive subscriptions to them in Nevada mining camps, you should be able
to find them somewhere in a Midwestern university city.
--
======================================================================
|| Holly Silva I have nothing terribly clever to say||
|| Applied Earth Sciences today. You're in luck. ||
|| Stanford University ||
mike.siemon
(William R. Smith) writes:
> Gerard Fryer writes:
> Could someone relate the U.S. school grades to British forms?
Ah, the sixth form -- the evanescent and possibly mythical interval
between secondary and higher education.
The simplest correspondence (and it will do at a pinch) is to read
the forms as the years past primary school. That is, a child of 10-
12 years finishes what in America is the sixth grade and here goes
on (sometimes) to "junior high school" continuing the count of grades.
In the Imperial tradition, that first year of secondary school would
be the first form. And fifth form takes one up to roughly the age
at which Americans complete highschool -- in my "simplest correspon-
dence" to the junior year. This is the year at which one takes one's
O-level exams (I've never seen the "O" expanded, I presume it stands
for "ordinary") which are those that determine the future for _hoi
polloi_
Scholars remain for another year or two, to prepare for the A-levels
("advanced?"). In the colonies, where I taught, the material of this
prep. was either absurd (highly elaborate and useless Newtonian mechanics,
taught as a maths discipline, along with more senseless integration tricks
than one could shake a workstation at) or at roughly the same level as
one finds in "lower class" [sic!] courses at an American University.
In the home counties, no doubt, the oddities of this system had been
addressed one way or another (to screams of outrage, of course); in
deepest Malaysia, the prior generation's templates were very much the
rage in educational circles that were grinding out the bureaucrats
of the coming generation.
I did some sixth-form teaching at my first posting, much to the
outrage of the earnest Babu headmaster, who *knew* from Time magazine
that no American could possibly be up to the task. His contacts in
the state education ministry contrived to divert me to a coastal
village school where, among Malays, I could of course do no harm.
Sadly, the Federal ministry intervened and I wound up at one of the
premier schools of the country (the only squash courts north of
Singapore...; staff vs. prefects rugby and cricket and other trials.
--
Michael L. Siemon "I know of nothing -- I suspect
not even death -- that is so fixed
m...@usl.com in the present tense as love."
standard disclaimer -- Jess Anderson
Christopher J. Henrich
{On why the ECONOMIST (London) stays literate & witty while TIME and
NEWSWEEK (New York) do not)
>
>Oh, come on, now. Both TIME and NEWSWEEK, as well as practically all of the
>daily newspapers, have changed their format/substance to try and "appeal to
>what the public wants". It nauseates the professional journalists (the term
>"professional" is used in the sense of "real" :-) in this instance) but the
>upper management mandates it. So although in one sense they can be blamed,
>in another sense they're only giving people what they want. (Not *all* people,
>of course. Neither I nor thou). They have to either make a profit or go into
>bankruptcy.
The tragedy is that this process of dumbing-down is a *mutual*
interaction. If the magazines aim low, then we the readers will be
induced to lower our standards. Then the magazines will aim even
lower... I see this happening in other parts of American culture,
like bookstores which seem to stock a less diverse, and more trashy,
selection as time goes by.
And yet, and yet... I've been seeing this go on for a few decades
now and the global situation hasn't gotten any worse. If anything,
the range and quality of choice available now, in Suburbia, USA, may
be better than it was in the Fifties. I said "may be" rather than
"is" because I am going by impressions and not hard data. But I am
sure that the bookstores around here today are not unequivocally
worse than those of 30 years ago. Individual ones do die out; or
they mutate into sellers of greeting cards and stationery. But
always there is another idealist starting out to run a "real"
bookstore.
I think the high literary quality of the ECONOMIST and other upscale
British journalism is related to the social class structure in
Britain. It is more clearly defined than that in America. (To some
extent, this is a matter of American bashfulness about class
differences.) The ability to appreciate witty allusions is a mark of
membership in the "educated classes" (roughly: the people who can
expect to be the bosses); and a Briton who belongs to these will have
no qualms about letting it be known.
The dark side of this is that a Briton who lacks the marks of "U"
class membership may be brutally snubbed. Last week, in the furore
over the marital misfortunes of the Royal Family, someone pointed out
that the Princess of Wales has some "non-U" speech habits. In
particular, she sometimes turns a "t" at the end of a syllable into
a "glottal stop." This would be enough to make the courtiers in
Buckingham Palace look down at her. Over the years, she would come
to feel frozen out. If this can happen to Princess Di, who is safe?
Cheers and all that,
Chris Henrich
Charles Packer
>the Washington Post. The NY Times is okay, but hey!
>no comics. Once you get on a diet of the Post, everything
The New York Times IS the comics...
Tom Maddox
>Ah, I am beginning to understand why Clayton Cramer ought not to be
>allowed to post to rec.arts.books. The gall of the man, bringing
>into a recreational group concerned with books what actual laws
>were passed about guns in Britain in 1870 and 1921.
Oh no, Professor McCarthy--you cannot hang on the rest of us the
whimsical (to say the least) manner of Fido, who abjures self, fact, and
who knows what else (except an undying allegiance to public schools).
I mean, first the meretricious Fido hangs "pseudo-intellectual" on
all r.a.b.ers (presumably excepting his own self, if he has one), then when
he is caught in brutal ignorance of Matters English (the arena where he has
implicitly, at least, asserted absolute authority) and replies, in effect,
"Falala, I'm Fido," you accuse all r.a.b.ers of being like Fido . . .
And *that* is a bit much. That you should want to crow about Cramer's
ascendancy over Fido, I can understand--I enjoyed it, and I think Cramer's a
tedious crackpot. However, take up with Fido himself his intellectual
bankruptcy or, more modestly, his unwillingness to confess that he had posted
pseudo-authoritative nonsense and been caught at it. I will bear the burden of
my own failings--moral, intellectual, and otherwise--but I see no reason to
bear Fido's.
--
Tom Maddox
tma...@netcom.com
"I swear I never heard the first shot"
Wm. Gibson, "Agrippa: a book of the dead"
Nick Haines
si...@pangea.Stanford.EDU (Holly Silva) reminds me of the existence of
the Atlantic Monthly.
OK, I own up, I was being unnecessarily harsh towards the news media
(or at least to that of magazines). I actually subscribe to the
Atlantic Monthly and to the Manchester Guardian Weekly, both of which
are at a 6th-form reading level. Neither, however, caters to the same
audience as, say, the New York Review of Books or Granta (my other
subscriptions). There seem to be very few _news_ journals at the same
level.
Nick
Ken Willing
wanting (namely reasonably well-informed, balanced, not excessively
longwinded summaries of the news) is actually in another medium: namely --
believe it or not --: radio. E.g., the hour-long news features programs on
the World Service of the BBC (available loud and clear anywhere, for free,
on short wave radio).
This is not meant facetiously, and far be it from me to be wanting to start
a debate about TV & radio. But personally I prefer to leave the job of the
provision of basic facts and ground-level interpretation to the [best of
the] electronic media; and then use paper'n'print for what it does best:
i.e., communication that is more considered, slower, more personally direct,
more deliberately cross-textual, etc. Hence the, if anything, increased
importance of what magazines like The Nation supply nowadays.
But let's face it, rags like Time Magazine never did amount to a hill of
beans. Thirty years ago, as today, if you happened to be a participant in
an event that Time subsequently reported, you could bet your bottom dollar
that that event would be garbled beyond recognition (plus, nine times out of
ten they would spell your name wrong).
Ken Willing <kwil...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au>
Macquarie University, Sydney 2109, Australia
[displaced Yank]
sometimes a Wombat
On the other hand, this week's THE ECONOMIST has a hillarious "company
brief" on the House of Windsor. It gives a brief history of the
transfers of ownership, and describes the various personages as product
lines, and describes how well they are doing in the market (The
Princess of Wales is by far the best selling product). A sample:
The current management has diversified into younger brands
and raised the firm's profiles through a new emphasis on
public relations. The stratagy was designed to increase
consumer awareness and stave off the distant possiblity that
customers might consider switching to a cheaper, presifdential,
product. But, as happened with Perrier's problems during the
bezene scandal in 1990, high brand awareness can cause
problems when the product is in doubt.
There is also a monarchy matrix, plotting the various products on
scales of functional vs. useless and entertaining vs. boring. The
Queen is the most functional, but a bit more boring than interesting.
Prince Edward bottoms out on both scales. The Princess of Wales is
just a touch less useful than the Queen, and just a touch less
entertaining than the Queen Mother. The Duchess of York is the next
most entertaining, but barely more useful than Prince Edward.
Personally, I rely mainly on NPR for my news, augmented by THE
ECONOMIST for non-economic analysis and international news that
America's Public Radio may have missed.
Larry "Back to the Fischer/Spasky debate" Hammer
--
| "Absence diminishes small loves and increases
L...@albert.physics.arizona.edu | great ones, as the wind blows out the candle
insanity needs no disclaimer | and blows up the bonfire." --La Rochefoucauld
Oliver Sharp
its parent newspaper, it devotes a good deal of attention to the world inside
the Beltway. However, I have found its world events coverage to be quite
good. It has great political cartoons, too :-). The writing is generally
quite good and not pitched at the USA Today readership. A number of the
regular columns are worth reading (David Broder, for example). The WPW
won't replace a good daily newspaper, but it makes a nice supplement. For
my main source of news, I rely on the NY Times and All Things Considered.
Public radio hasn't followed TimeWeek to the depths of idiocy, thank heavens.
The local papers are pretty bad; the SF Chronicle and Examiner just don't
cover the world news with any kind of acceptable depth. They have their
uses, as does the San Jose Mercury News, but they just don't come close to
replacing the NYT.
- Oliver
Jack Campin
> ...this week's THE ECONOMIST has a hillarious "company brief" on the House
> of Windsor.
A joke which was used by quite a number of British left publications
throughout the Thatcher era. I first saw a spoof proposal to privatize the
monarchy, with Borbon SA and Hohenzollern GmbH cited as prospective buyers,
in a strike paper put out by Manchester journalists in 1983. More
recently, "Class War" has used variants of it a few times. It might be a
new one to the average "Economist" reader, though.
It's odd how the evaluation of the "Economist" by bourgeois Americans
parallels their appreciation of British pseudo-traditional TV shows; the
cult that started with "Upstairs, Downstairs" and "The Forsyte Saga".
"Class War" would give the average American a much better idea of what the
UK is like (as would the paper it was modelled on, the "News of the World").
[ followups directed *again* to rec.mag... ]
--
-- Jack Campin room G092, Computing Science Department, Glasgow University,
17 Lilybank Gardens, Glasgow G12 8RZ, Scotland TEL: 041 339 8855 x6854 (work)
INTERNET: ja...@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk or via nsfnet-relay.ac.uk FAX: 041 330 4913
BANG!net: via mcsun and uknet BITNET: via UKACRL UUCP: ja...@glasgow.uucp
Mark McWiggins
the tobacco industry to protect their revenue from cigarette ads.
This was reported in The Washington Monthly, which as I recall ran the
offending article. I still subscribe to the Monthly.
--
Mark McWiggins +1 206 822 5200x377 days Box 31356
mar...@sierra.com +1 206 632 1905 24 hrs. Seattle WA 98103-1356
Anand Bemra
> ... have their uses, as does the San Jose Mercury News,
> but they just don't come close to replacing the NYT.
May I suggest you to get hold of "Lies Of Our [NY] Times", Sheridan Press,
(212 254 1061) to check out the slant of the NYT. Another recommendation
would be "Media Monopoly" by Ben Bagdikian. It gives a good insight as to
what factors determine the outlook of a newspaper/magazine.
Cheers,
anand
--
Screw PBS & NPR news. Tired of news "sanitized for your protection?". Try:
misc.activism.progressive, "Lies Of Our [NY]Times", "Z" magazine (Boston).
KPFA 94.1 FM (Bay Area), 90.7 (L.A.), 90.1 (Houston, TX), 89.3 (Washington, DC)
These are my opinions, not my employer's.
Christopher J Carne
>In article <1992Sep2.2...@news.Hawaii.Edu> ger...@caliban.soest.hawaii.edu (Gerard Fryer) writes:
>
>>a mere sixth form reading and comprehension ability. Well that's
>>are aimed at about ninth grade (i.e., third form).
>
>specialised technical content which puts it beyond the intelligent
>layman or general reader. For a general readership weekly that is a
>very high standard. It's a lot higher than the net!
>Chris Malcolm c...@uk.ac.ed.aifh +44 (0)31 650 3085
>Department of Artificial Intelligence, Edinburgh University
>5 Forrest Hill, Edinburgh, EH1 2QL, UK DoD #205
I would argue with the points that NS is beyond the general reader or
that its content is particularly specialised or technical. Compared with
the sort of paper that gets published in (for example) 'Nature' it seems
an exemplary piece of popularisation and while I might go to NS to
get a broad (and reasonably accurate) account of current scientific
developments, if I were a specialist looking for a technical account
then the NS would be totally inadequate. BTW have you tried looking in
some of the more technical news groups lately, I've seen debates on
much higher levels than in NS. On the whole though, NS is always a good
read (I'm not a scientist BTW, I'm a sociologist) and usually manages
to give the impression that the reader is not being patronised.
I wonder whether NS is seen as so good when its published something
in ones own field. For example, NS recently (ie sometime this year)
publish an article on AI and related issues by the sociologist
Harry Collins. Now, Collins' last book 'Artificial Experts' is
not renowned for its exellence (ie it's bad) and he is seen as
as representative of a methodologiucally and philosophically reactionary
position. So an article that claims to exemplify the sociological
approach to certain developments in AI is published. The fact that
Collins' is not representative of such approaches and indeed has
shown that he has little deep knowledge of the subject is offset by
the fact that many more scientists will have read this article than
will ever read anything in the Sociology of Science journals. I
guess that as Collins' reputation is on the wane amongst his
fellow sociologist he can try and maintain it amongst the non-
specialists who know no better.
I wonder if this is a common feeling. The 'Why did they publish
him/her?' response, when you see an NS article by someone you
consider a fool or charlatan (ie anyone who disagress with you)
presented uncritically as in the Collins case. It is not often
that work in the sociology of science comes to the public domain
so when it does I would like it to be well represnted and the NS
failed to do that. One starts then to wonder if other diciplines
are getting represented in a poor way too, maybe the success of the
NS is that tas science is so fragmented there will always be a
significant amount of people who will not know how well an issue is
covered, maybe all we want is token knowledge anyway. For myself
I'm prepared to admit publishing Collins was an aberration by
editors who (hopefully) know more about science than about current
reputations of certain sociologists, but I am still somewhat annoyed.
Chris Carne,
Center for Research into Innovation, Culture and Technology [CRICT],
Brunel University,
Uxbridge
Bernard Silver
I wonder whether NS [New Scientist] is seen as so good when its
published something in ones own field.
No! It often seems simplistic and wrong (at least in my field, Artificial
Intelligence) and I have heard others in other fields complain as
well. However, this is probably true of all general publications
(i.e. not really specialized learned journals).
I recall a net posting about a year ago, on the subject of Consumer Reports
(The US version of "Which?" for UK readers). The poster said that
he/she ignores as laughable the articles on what PC to buy, but takes
very seriously the discussion on circular saws. He/she then realizes
that the carpenter down the street is doing the reverse!
--
Bernard Silver
GTE Laboratories
bsi...@gte.com
(617) 466-2663
Matthew Huntbach
>In article <BuKMu...@brunel.ac.uk> Christop...@brunel.ac.uk >(Christopher J Carne) writes:
>
> I wonder whether NS [New Scientist] is seen as so good when its
> published something in ones own field.
>
>No! It often seems simplistic and wrong (at least in my field, Artificial
>Intelligence) and I have heard others in other fields complain as
>well.
Unfortunately, this seems to be a feature of press coverage of
Artificial Intelligence. The more ludicrous and over-the-top
you go about what is achievable, the more likely you are to get
press coverage. A number of the "big names" in AI ought to be
thoroughly ashamed of themselves for some of the remarks
they've made, but not only are they not, they're still making
them.
Matthew Huntbach
Chris Malcolm
>In article <BuKMu...@brunel.ac.uk> Christop...@brunel.ac.uk (Christopher J Carne) writes:
> I wonder whether NS [New Scientist] is seen as so good when its
> published something in ones own field.
>No! It often seems simplistic and wrong (at least in my field, Artificial
>Intelligence) and I have heard others in other fields complain as
>well.
For some odd reason the NS seems especially bad at AI. I get the
impression that the NS scientific culture still suffers from
Lighthillism. On the other hand, the Economist is surprisingly good!
Chris Malcolm
>Unfortunately, this seems to be a feature of press coverage of
>Artificial Intelligence. The more ludicrous and over-the-top
>you go about what is achievable, the more likely you are to get
>press coverage. A number of the "big names" in AI ought to be
>thoroughly ashamed of themselves for some of the remarks
>they've made, but not only are they not, they're still making
>them.
I suspect that there is a difference here between "big names in AI"
i.e. people with substantial research credit, and "popular pundits"
whom the press rely on for good "gee whizz" quotes. Care to name some
of these big names, together with their over-the-top remarks, so as to
discredit my hypothesis?