<p>The Economist is highly neoliberal, deregulation etc, i still read it even though many of my views differ, its well written, but they editorialze a lot (naturally)</p>
<p>Time is garbage. Newsweek is OK. Economist is best. WSJ is very good too; I'd suggest the online version (has features and sidebars not in the print version).</p>
<p>I'm going to have to jump on the bandwagon and recommend The Economist as well. However, at least the latest five issues are always available online for free at Economist.com (in fact the number is higher I think, but I'm not sure how much so). So if you are just reading week to week and don't need them for research purposes, I would just read them online. Same goes for Newsweek.com and Time.com (although I definitely prefer The Economist's analysis).</p>
<p>I think everyone missed the point of the original poster's question. Not only did he ask which, between Time and Newsweek, was better, but which one was less biased. The Economist is certainly biased (it's British and has a clear editorial line) and The Atlantic Monthly is also biased towards the liberal side.</p>
<p>What I find funny is that no one makes the distinction between news reporting and news analysis. Time and Newsweek report the news. The Atlantic Monthly, the New Yorker, Harper's, etc. analyze trends and discuss issues. The Economist works in between news reporting and news analysis. The comment that Time is crap is really interesting, considering the number of breaking stories they still manage to publish. The Haditha murders come to mind recently. The New York Times has a broad range of stories, and all of it is free now with a student email address. In the end, you can find anything online. </p>
<p>I would choose Time, only since they have their new editor-in-chief. They have changed quite a bit, and I really like their new designs and news coverage. It's not for everyone, but that's fine.</p>
<p>Thanks yall, I guess I'll reconsider subscribing the magazine.</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
The comment that Time is crap is really interesting, considering the number of breaking stories they still manage to publish.
[/QUOTE]
</p>
<p>In all fairness, I stopped reading TIME a while ago -- because it seemed like there was only one or two stories of substance in the whole magazine. It was bathroom reading to me.</p>
<p>Just read the news, any editorial like that is biased.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Times Select online is free if you've got a student email address.</p>
[/quote]
</a></p>
<p>I know this is a bit off-topic, but DUDE THANKS! I somehow missed that!</p>
<p>I'm not sure if the news has any substance anymore regardless of what you read.</p>
<p>First of all, the Economist and the Wall Street Journal are very right-wing and they editorize, Time is probably the most balanced, but imo, it doesnt match how well-writen the Economist is, I would not recommend the WSJ though, the New York Times, the Economist, and some alternative media (democracynow.org) is the best.</p>
<p>Out of those 2 magazines, Time</p>
<p>Perhaps you're confusing "right-wing" with "libertarian" or "capitalistic". Both publications have been very critical of Bush's policy in the past 2-3 years. I'm wondering if you actually read the two, or just are spouting what you've heard about them.</p>
<p>Neither if you want something unbiased. I prefer The Economist, like a bunch of others already said.</p>
<p>no your just confusing the term right-wing, libertarianism (deregulated capitalism) (american not european) is as right-wing as you can get economically, and I've read every economist for the past 2 years or so, and only occasionally read the Journal.</p>
<p>A lot of the neoliberal trade doctrine that the Economist espouses has really been attacked in the past few years, neo-keynesian is the way to go, but since I'm pro-trade and deregulating in some situations I can stand the Economist, but they editorize a lot, how can you not admit that?</p>
<p>I guess I'll choose economist, thanks yall</p>
<p>If you're poor like most college students, you can read the periodicals online. The economist still has a few articles that need a subscription. You can also look at some of the articles for each periodical online and see which one you prefer.</p>
<p>What's wrong with Playboy? I find the journalism in Playboy to be extremely good. Also, one of the posters was saying that you can judge the quality of a magazine based on the types of ads it contains - Playboy wins on that count too.</p>
<p>badman89</p>
<p>I don't think people subscribe Playboy magazine to read articles....</p>
<p>My vote goes to the New York Times. They are the best! The Sunday paper is like ice cream on a hot day.</p>