I did not get much out of Michael Hirschorn's article on why The Economist is thriving against Time and Newsweek but perhaps this is his point. After all he says the following of the Economist:
At its worst, the writing can be shoddy, thin research supporting smug hypotheses. ... Pieces like these tend to support the Economist-haters, who believe the magazine is simply conventional-wisdom-spewing crack for Anglophiles.