|WikiProject Magazines||(Rated C-class, Low-importance)|
|WikiProject Journalism||(Rated C-class, Low-importance)|
What about some information on the magazine's political stance? Probably legit to offer some kind of information along those lines. The Atlantic is usually regarded as a little left of center -- it has certainly featured works deeply critical of the Bush administration -- but with regular contributions by Robert Kaplan, P. J. O'Rourke, and David Brooks, I wonder whether it would be safer to classify this magazine as right-of-center?
I know this might raise POV issues, but nobody would object to writing that The Nation is a left-leaning publication, the New Republic is hawkish, and the American Spectator right-leaning. Anyway, thought I'd ask. Bds yahoo 02:55, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- I don't think any one political label fairly describes the Atlantic. One reason is that it is not really a political magazine like the New Republic or American Spectator, though it does a number of stories with political angles. It does tend to cater to East Coast sensibilities, so in that sense one could say it leans left, but they're not reluctant to publish articles by conservative writers like the ones you mentioned. I'd call it politically ecumenical. --Polynova 22:00, Jan 3, 2005 (UTC)
One fairly neutral thing to do is to make mention of the ownership and funding of the magazine. ISTR that THE ATLANTIC switched to a not-for-profit status awhile back, but I'm not sure about the particulars.
I think it's important to mention the class component of the magazine and it's audience explicitly as it is characteristic of the publication.
Hi, I'm a subscriber to the Atlantic and I don't think it is left or right, and I think saying "While many of The Atlantic's articles are nonpolitical or written from a moderate stance, the magazine is generally considered to have a liberal slant" still goes too far. I vote for Democrats and Republicans. If the National Journal qualifies as "nonpartisan", why shouldn't the Atlantic? True, the Atlantic is edgier than National Journal, but publishing "works deeply critical of the Bush administration" should not earn a magazine a liberal or left-of-center label. (If it does, I fear for US journalism.) For example, George Will is a dyed-in-the-wool conservative but he's written very critical opinion pieces about the Bush administration's poor fiscal discipline, curtailment of civil liberties, etc. So have "arch conservatives" Robert Novak and Charles Krauthammer. Are they left-of-center? No way. I recall an insightful article in the Atlantic about Roe v. Wade where the (staff?) author wrote that Roe was unconstitutional and abortion should be decided by legislatures. I don't think that's a liberal position. Anyway, I think the Atlantic should be called "nonpartisan," or at least that it presents both liberal and conservative authors and perspectives, and in sum, plays it straight. Honestly, I would actually argue that the Atlantic is a "progressive" publication. And I still consider the term "progressive" neither liberal nor conservative (i.e. the meaning it used to have before liberals started trying to rebrand themselves as "progressives.") Just my 2¢. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 22:55, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
- I imagine if you did a survey of Atlantic journalists, most would vote Democrat. It's notable only one of their bloggers is Republican (though McArdle, Sullivan and Crook are all arguably right-of-center, to some degree, they're backing Obama this cycle at least). This is liberal bias of a cultural East Coast type, mainly, I think. 184.108.40.206 (talk) 19:43, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
This article is self-contradicting. It describes the magazine as "center-right", but yet places it in the "Modern American Liberal Magazines" group —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 16:54, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Is it really necessary to ascribe a political leaning to this magazine? A few things to consider. First, unlike other periodicals, The Atlantic never (so far as I have seen) publishes anything resembling a staff editorial. Everything is signed. It is not possible to apply the same rules by which we would describe the New York Times as having a liberal editorial slant or the Wall Street Journal as having a conservative slant. Similarly, the variety of content on the Atlantic's pages suggests that they are not at all trying to advance a specific political agenda. Second, the argument that the because its readership is probably skewed toward East Coast liberals is entirely specious. This is like saying the Washington Post is pro-Administration (Republican or Democrat) because so many of its readers are federal employees. Moreover, we shouldn't be commenting on the economic or social makeup of the magazines audience without, you know, facts. As for the idea that it should be called "progressive," that doesn't work either. Unless applied to the Progressive movement of the early 20th century, this term is to vague and frankly too normatively charged to be used in any objective way. "Progress" is like motherhood and apple pie, but reasonable people differ on what actually constitutes progress. So let's banish that term altogether —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jcmitch96 (talk • contribs) 18:02, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
Apart from Left-Right issues, it would be interesting to inquire on The Atlantic's positions on the Mideast conflict, as would be the case for many notable publications. ADM (talk) 11:28, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
This story may shed some light on The Atlantic's political leanings, or lack there of. A spokeswoman is quoted as stating that "as an institution, The Atlantic is part of ‘no party or clique,’ as our founders put it." Might be worth noting this in the article and stating that as a journal, The Atlantic has no notable political leanings. Individual authors of stories published there might vary in their personal views, but on the whole, the publication does not have a strong conservative or liberal bias. SteveChervitzTrutane (talk) 08:23, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Funny, I came to this article specifically to see if there was mention of any political bias in the publication. I was citing it on a controversial and wanted to know whether I should expect responses like "That proves nothing! What do you expect from a liberal (or conservative?) rag like that." Rather than debating which of two terms to apply, and given how polarized and partisan so much mainstream media is, it seems it would be a good idea to point out that it is in fact neither (or both). To think that there is still a place where liberals and conservatives can both speak to the same audience! What a relief. If you need a label for that, how about "sanity." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 03:16, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
Someone labeled it as liberal. I dont think its liberal at all. its mostly pragmatic. It does have liberal commentators. Its online blogs tend to lean liberal. But its overall theme, and main articles are not liberal. Please refrain from labeling it conservative or liberal until you have discussed it here! Surag (talk) 03:50, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
- After Morgan Entrekin left, so did P.J. O'Rourke. Anyone visiting the blog pages of the Atlantic ("Atlantic Wire") will notice a strong liberal tilt to the features there, to the point that they were slinging mud at the Blue Dog Democrats during the early budget debates in Obama's first term (and by that, I mean rumors about some of these guys' personal lives). And the commenters definitely lean left and rather vulgar. So the print edition of Atlantic may still be balanced, politically, but its blog is way off to the left.22.214.171.124 (talk) 08:42, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
Requested move 2008
1927 letter by Al Smith
I found this interesting letter from Al Smith, in response to accusations by Charles C. Marshall that Smith would be against Church-State separation. It could perhaps be included in the history section of the article. Part of the dialogue mentions the encyclical Immortale Dei by Pope Leo XIII.   ADM (talk) 23:36, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
Proposed move 2011
NPOV problems with sections "Atlantic Wire" and "Atlantic Cities"
Reading the last two sections of "The Atlantic," "Atlantic Wire" and "Atlantic Cities," it's difficult to not see those paragraphs as laudatory of the subject matter to the point that they are effectively unpaid advertisements for these features of "The Atlantic." They are definitely not NPOV. I'm going to change the paragraphs to make them less nakedly laudatory toward their subject matter.126.96.36.199 (talk) 08:51, 31 December 2012 (UTC) . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 05:01, 17 May 2014 (UTC)