Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (141119)	7/21/2004 2:14:32 PM
From: John Soileau	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I've seen The Nation, and it's typically fringy and hysterical. Some of the ads in the back are close to scary. I've surely never heard that mag called mainstream! Zmag I'm unfamiliar with. John

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (141119)	7/21/2004 4:53:19 PM
From: GST	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

With most of the world and now a majority of Americans being of the view that we should not have invaded Iraq, I would not call opposition to war "fringe". People of ALL political stripes oppose the war, although many Republicans support the war out of party loyalty.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (141119)	7/21/2004 9:20:36 PM
From: Win Smith	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Nadine, do you have any idea what the circulation of "The Nation" is? I couldn't find an exact figure when I looked, but it seems it'd be lucky if it hits 100k from this snippet from an article about "Reason": Although the magazine's circulation is tiny by Time or Reader's Digest standards, it has more than doubled in the past 10 years to 61,000, surpassing the conservative Weekly Standard and closing in on the liberal Nation and New Republic. (google cache hit, 64.233.167.104 ) For comparison, a list of general magazine circulation figures can be seen at adage.com . To a first order approximation, I'd say essentially nobody reads "The Nation", or equivalent political commentary magazines in general. Which is all to the good, from my point of view, as near as I can tell "political commentary" in general is more or less synonymous with the Fox News sense of "fair and balanced". Unfortunately, way too many people apparently listen to Rush Limbaugh, who seems capable of making practically anybody who shows up in print seem reasonable by comparison, but that's another story.