Molson Hart

The Economist is still good.

Suggestion: Look at the foreign policy actions The Economist has advocated in the past two decades, and then evaluate how successful/catastrophic those have been, and then maybe reconsider your belief that "The Economist is still good".

Do they do better or worse than countries?

They’re part of the same national security establishment. And they've failed catastrophically. They've destroyed entire countries, caused the deaths of well over a million people, ruined tens of millions of lives, unnecessarily increased tensions with other nuclear superpowers

That's really really bad. They failed spectacularly at exactly those things they think they’re good at. And an incredible number of people lost their lives their health, their loved ones, their economic future etc as a result Isn't that enough to say they are not ’still good'?

I’m with everyone saying the economist is bad. Occasionally they write interesting articles but on average their views are warped. Coverage of elections and potential wars as this koen guy says are particularly bad.