A Year in Time
With my subscription of The Economist due to expire next month, and some frequent flier miles also due to expire soon, I decided to change things up a bit - I've been subscribing to The Economist for a few years straight now - and let that subscription lapse and pick up Time Magazine instead. As much as I will miss all I love about The Economist, I figured it would be good to get a different perspective for a year. Besides, I have fond memories of reading Time at my aunt's house, and always found it the more serious of the Time/Newsweek/USNews triumvirate.
Uh, times have changed. I saw a recent copy of Time at my office so I flipped through it during lunch. It is, how shall I put this? My wife described it as "People Magazine for news." Co-sign: more pictures than words, and the words are in very small doses. Some are even yellow-highlighted! And don't get me started on the distribution of coverage.
My wife said I should just get The Economist in parallel, lest I die of information starvation. But I protested that my brain only has room for one news magazine. For the next year or so, it will be Time. Let's hope there's more sustenance in future issues than there was in the issue I looked at earlier this week.
Comments
Remember, Lee, never consider sunk cost!
My problem with the printed Economist was that I couldn't absorb that much info every week. But I do love reading their Politics and Business weekly digest emails, and the email with links to their highlighted articles.
Sadly, I think you're right: Time is the still the most serious of the Time/Newsweek/USNews trio.
Btw, I don't lament the cost of the Time subscription (I used miles that were about to expire), I'm lamenting the loss of having The Economist as my companion for the year. So it's much more costly a loss. You will now see 10 percent dumber posts from me for the next 12 months. ;)