+1 for the Economist. You get much more value than what you pay for an annual subscription. This week's edition has a letter to the editor from the president of Peru... It's that kind of publication.

The problem I have with the economist is they mix opinion into almost everything they report. It's a very British aristocratic opinion. I can almost hear the exaggerated accent sometimes when reading it, like it's a Monty Python skit. I find it annoyingly predictable and somewhat patronizing to the reader.

That's a bit vague. "Can be read in an exaggerated British accent" (whatever you're imagining there) is not an ideological position.

I'd also echo that The Economist is well worth a subscription. It also has the interesting quirk that doesn't use bylines and all articles are published anonymously.

That and listen to a short, quality news bulletin once a day like NPR or the BBC is all you want.

You'll battle to find a better source than The Economist.

It is not as good as it was, as their editor was replaced last year.

The Economist is a good review, but it's laughable that so many people think it answers for "not particularly ideological". Capitalism is an ideology - albeit one basically invisible to Hacker News members - and the Economist has that one in spades.

School of Agnelli and Rotschild (proprietors), the "dulce et decorum est pro libertate mori" sort.

(This freedom stuff has to be dosed carefully: owners moving themselves or their stuff, fine and dandy. Cattle moving around unsupervised or mouthing off, not good.)

Yup. And since most of the frequent contributors on HN think basically the same way, they don't even notice the ideological stance.