Julian Sanchez | April 2, 2004
Hey, did anyone else find the concept behind the cover image of the most recent issue of The Economist vaguely familiar?
Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.
They're not the same thing at all. The Economist suggests where
Bush's weak spots are so that a Democrat may attack. Reason
cherry-picked the select positive aspects of Dem candidates and
built two golems.
Also, is this the first Economist cover to feature dick and fart
jokes? That's another difference.
I can remember something similar in Le Monde Diplomatique concerning Mitterand from the early 1980s.
I like the Economist. I don't always agree with their editorial standpoint, but I always find their reporting interesting.
FWIW, I don't actually imagine the Economist art people were inspired by the Reason poster; just amused by the coincidence.
Well, if they copied Reason then they should have duplicated it to test attitudes on copyright.
(useless nostalgia follows) What made me first pick up a copy of the Economist in high school was a Reason article on what magazines you should subscribe to given an $100-a-year budget (the others were the Atlantic, Scientific American or Technology Review, and of course Reason). I have used it to appear smart to my airplane seatmates ever since.
"FWIW, I don't actually imagine the Economist art people were
inspired by the Reason poster; just amused by the
coincidence."
Julian,
You DID say "The sincerest form of flattery", which implies
imitation, which implies their having seen the Reason art.
The one done by Mad Magazine (one of the ones done by Mad, anyway) made the composite candidate look like Alfred E. Newman.
Well, if it turns out that folks across the pond at The Economist are reading Reason, this is a good thing. It seems a reasonable speculation, at least.
Yeah, I have to agree with Dink; this is not similar enough. If the Economist had Martha Stewart gazing upward or Rupert Murdoch as a dominatrix, that would be a different matter.
Per Larry, I DID enjoy the Rupert Murdoch as a dominatrix, however. It kinda gave me nightmares. Kinky ones.
The Economist is pretty much an older version of Reason. Their
opinions and analysis on all major issues is entirely congruent
with Reason's.
However, they have started to lose the plot recently. For instance,
they prematurely decided that Dean was going to the be Democratic
nominee. And in the past few issues they have shown an ever greater
bias in favour of John Kerry (see for instance last week's
Lexington).
Reasonable analysis must be based on facts, not bias - which is why
I am switching subscriptions.
>...the Democratic alternative (almost certainly to be John Kerry as of this writing)...
There are enough layers of production that, by the time an issue's in your mailbox (April shipped at the start of March), it's probably been at least a month and a half, possibly more, since the articles inside were written. So we've got to hedge a bit.
MAD > Reason > Economist
I'm confused. Which came first, the chicken or the egg?
I certainly like Reason the best!
Speaking of nostaligia, I've missed the Terry Colon contributions to Suck's Fillers'. Thanks for keeping him in work, Mr Mxylpyx and, uh, was it Bertoldt Blecht or BarTel D'Arcy?
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245