I normally hate to write uncritical posts which sound like commercials (unless they are about FON, of course), but I will this time. The Economist is simply the best magazine in the world.

My answer is yes (to the question if i was LOST in an uninhabited island and had only one magazine to read). And this would be the case even if I were lost with that hot babe from LOST. I still would want to read The Economist. Why? Here’s a list of reasons.

I am an internet entrepreneur, and although I read all my news of the internet, The Economist is the only print media I read, mostly because it is the only paper that stands the test of time. The editors of The Economist understand that news is not news because it is “new”, but because it is newsworthy and what they chose is worthwhile reading. Pick a 5 year old Business Week and a 5 year old Economist and see what I mean. Maybe it’s the magazine’s scope — so wide that it makes its writers excel in the craft of brevity, a skill us readers really appreciate.

Why can’t Business Week, Fortune, Forbes not achieve the same? I can think of two reasons. One is that their writers and editors are less talented. But the other, which is more likely, is that those magazines main objective is to explain why some companies make it and others don’t. The Economist’s objective is to explain why humanity makes it…or fails. And they are very good at that in spite of their conservative leanings.

Follow Martin Varsavsky on Twitter: twitter.com/martinvars

No Comments

nicoguyon on March 15, 2007  · 

Andreas Ehn on March 15, 2007  · 

stefanos on March 15, 2007  · 

oliver on March 15, 2007  · 

Martín Varsavsky on March 15, 2007  · 

Martin Varsavsky on March 15, 2007  · 

Homo Viator on March 16, 2007  · 

Marcos Martinez Sancho on March 16, 2007  · 

andres werner on May 31, 2007  · 

Julian Martinez on June 4, 2007  · 

Martin Varsavsky on June 4, 2007  · 

Leave a Comment

Español / English


Subscribe to e-mail bulletin:
Recent Tweets