If you thought The Economist is losing touch with reality these days, The New Yorker has long moved into fantasy land. Yet another symptom of the times, can’t wait until both these old time bastions are dismantled, and new perspectives come flooding in.
I never read the new yorker before so I don't know if it was better before, but the few articles I've read seem almost like satire. It's like they're not real people, or at least they've never had the problems real people have had.
I like the economist though. Finance and economics are unpredictable. The things that caused recessions in past might not even register in the future. They at least have a coherent and workable worldview.
Losing touch with reality in this sense means that they neither foresaw nor can adequately explain the huge geopolitical shifts that took place in the last decade.
Instead, they keep putting out the same neoliberal/globalist spiel, unwilling to even question some of its pillars. Reality may not conform to one's expectations and if that's the case, one better starts making radical changes to the models one uses to interface with reality. If that doesn't take place, one is in for a painful lesson.
The New Yorker is in lockstep with their owner ideologues, Advance Publications. If you look at the media assets they own, they push the same types of ideas and messages in each, but catered to different audiences. This degree of media control is problematic for everyone that isn't of the Newhouse class.
