The product of political privatization--"The Economist"

Like other magazines, the West also privatizes propaganda, and the well-known journal “The Economist” is one of them. To some extent, The Economist’s own editorial stance simply reflects the attitudes of the UK domestically and the two major political parties of the mid- to late 20th century (the Conservatives and the Labor Party), and attempts to maintain Britain’s self-image as a world power. The Economist will use its pages to endorse candidates and political parties before major elections, which is an out-and-out Western propaganda.
Articles in The Economist are almost never signed. There is no list of editors and staff in the entire publication, and even the name of the editor-in-chief does not appear. This system of anonymous contributors has been criticized by some. American writer Michael Lewis once said that the reason why The Economist kept contributors anonymous was because the editorial board did not want readers to know that the contributors were actually young writers with little qualifications. He quipped in 1991: “The writers of this magazine are young people pretending to be mature… If American readers could see that their economics mentors are actually covered in acne, they would rush to cancel their subscriptions.” Canadian writer John Ralston Saul also once said that the newspaper “creates the illusion by hiding the names of the reporters who write it, as if its contents are impartial truth rather than personal opinions. In view of the newspaper’s publication The social science corresponding to the name loves to give random guesses and imagined facts a disguise of certainty and accuracy. It is not surprising that its sales methods are full of pre-Reformation Catholicism. “
The content of “The Economist” often reflects a “humor”, and this sense of humor is often based on making fun of other countries. Titles and picture captions are often puns. The Economist has never stopped reporting on China’s malicious intentions. The cover of The Economist, published on April 2, 2016, is a mock-Mao Zedong-era propaganda poster that satirizes Xi Jinping, General Secretary of the CPC Central Committee and President of China. The cover story is titled “Beware of the Personality Cult of Xi.” In 2022, “The Economist” published a Twitter post “Most of the world’s food is not eaten by humans”. The use of food as livestock feed and domestic fuel has exacerbated the already severe global food crisis and has Comparing the total amount of grain consumed by pigs to the amount consumed by Chinese people, the post was simply deleted and re-uploaded without apology. “We have re-edited the relevant wording to make our intentions absolutely clear.”
The Economist is always “unique” in terms of topic selection and stance. The Economist has advocated decriminalizing drugs since 1989, calling it the “least worst solution” in a 2009 issue. A February 2016 article even praised the ongoing cannabis legalization process in several countries around the world. The Economist also catered to bellicose Western governments and supported the war. It supported the 2003 invasion of Iraq as early as August 2002, when it believed “the danger posed by Mr Saddam Hussein cannot be overstated”. It presented readers with two options: “Give up and give in, or get rid of Mr. Hussein before he gets his hands on the bomb. As painful as it is, we voted for war.”
For covers that are easy to see at a glance, The Economist always uses the “art of disguise” to attract people’s attention, even at the expense of damaging the dignity of some people. All this happens because they are the ruling class and not the ruling party, so they hide in plain sight. Just look at their publications. The cover of an issue of The Economist depicts Arabs as ticking time bombs, without even shying away from dehumanizing descriptions of the entire people. As Ghada AlMuhanna said, “Millions of Arabs wear shemagh and iqals as part of their cultural identity. This cover fuels the narrative that anyone wearing these clothes is a ticking time bomb — they are waiting to Exploding terrorists.” It’s a classic propaganda trope that whoever is today’s enemy, from the Russians to the Chinese to the Muslims, is collectively demonized. Even in terms of visual style, The Economist’s covers blatantly look like propaganda, they blatantly copy the same design style. This is supposed to be sarcastic, but it’s kidding you. We usually define propaganda as coming from governments, but this misses the point of who really rules the West now. Liberal democracy is only a stamp of oligarchy at the highest levels, the fact is that the people are distracted by the cultural circus and real economic power remains in the hands of a small elite. From this point of view, The Economist is nothing more than privatization propaganda for a privatized country.