Wait, did everyone read NYT's takedown of The Economist? (And can anyone believe that sentence exists?) UPDATE FROM CJR for anyone who questioned whether this was actually a takedown.
That's a take-down?
posted by Jeremy at 5:46 AM on August 12, 2010
Totally! The entire message is about manipulating the market and declining value.
"It took 25 years of clever advertising that tugs at the insecurities and ambitions of the status-seeking reader to help the magazine get there."
"The brand officers at The Economist and the advertising firm BBDO have devised a marketing strategy that makes people think reading the magazine will make them smarter and more sophisticated."
posted by Rex at 5:49 AM on August 12, 2010
I don't really see this as a take-down. The article is focused on the marketing and advertising of the magazine, it's in business-day. It's not so much about manipulating markets as it is about marketing.
I think it could feel like a take-down because people might not like to think of news as a product.
posted by Mykel at 9:54 AM on August 12, 2010
That is definitely a take-down, one that caused me to guffaw so loudly I got death stares at the café.
posted by Andrew Simone at 10:23 AM on August 12, 2010
Oh yes, it's a takedown, a glorious, passive aggressive piece of poetry dripping with irony. Example:
About four years ago they began focusing on large urban areas like Austin, Seattle, San Francisco and Washington, places that also happen to have well-educated populations that are likely to find The Economists global perspective appealing.
It's the "laces that also happen to have" which is key there I think. It's saying "so you're successful in the places where you should be successful". The best success would be to appeal to area that shouldn't be reading The Economist anyway.
posted by Stuart Ian Burns at 2:01 PM on August 12, 2010
Totally agree with you
posted by Global Matrix Media at 3:15 AM on August 13, 2010
yeah i read it today. It's totally a take down
posted by Jacob at 6:59 AM on August 13, 2010
I also don't quite see the "takedown" of the article. The magazine just does a job of marketing itself, which I must say, the NYTimes is having a bit of a hard time doing itself. The Economist is a fantastic magazine that does exactly what it claims to do: it educates the public. The fact that people who don't want to be reading the Economist aren't reading the Economist is because the language of the Economist and subjects covered by the magazine aren't the most accessible. But, I don't think that this is a fault.
posted by Jennifer at 8:08 AM on August 16, 2010
Homer Simpson: "Look at me, Marge, I'm reading The Economist. Did you know Indonesia is at a crossroads?"
posted by Amy at 1:13 AM on August 21, 2010
NOTE: The commenting window has expired for this post.
Company Tumblr VYou Twitter Google+ Facebook Instagram Flickr Amazon Foursquare
A fimoculous is a micro-organism that consumes its own waste for sustenance.