The absolute best journalism anywhere in the world all in one place. Thank you for the report on the war in Sudan. I am an American, and collectively we very distracted. This is such an important story; don’t let us forget or ignore what is happening. Hearing the personal stories of those affected and their families helps tremendously.

Plainly uninformed journalism with a nice voice. A few words out of place really make a difference when reporting and change entire meanings. Unfortunate

I love the first two stories every day. The third story is often a total waste of my time. Most recently, I was disheartened by the totally non-compelling stories on British beach huts and a dead king’s swans.

I really enjoy the depth and consistent day-to-day quality of the podcast. The new weekend sessions are great. My one complaint is that Jason needs a better quality microphone. His audio quality differs greatly from the other host and most guests. Some days it just irritates me. Keep up the good work.

Most new stadium tax paying upgrades the road, parking lot, most to income spent to where spent. For local bar in area.

The latest episode featured an extremely biased and unsophisticated analysis of the rise of housing costs around the world and, in the case of Stockholm, squarely laid the blame on rent control policies for the housing crisis there. Their understanding of rent control is elementary, as they seemingly conflate (and then clarify that they are not conflating—but who cares at that point) rent ceilings and the yearly permitted increase of rent stabilization policies which are the only form of rent control observed today. Surprisingly, however, they contradict themselves, saying that there are cases where rent control can work, as long as it’s paired with a concerted push for plentiful supply, like in Vienna, their example of choice. However they are quick to dismiss the idea of learning any lessons from Vienna, because after all, it’s not because of rent control that housing is affordable there, it’s because they increased supply (which they just set as a precondition, but whatever) and because the population hasn’t grown since WW2 (well neither has the population of their comparative case study Manhattan, which has never recovered its previous peak set in 1950). Overall this headline story really does illustrate their blind adherence to propping up an industry which does not create any inherent value or drive much innovation. It shouldn’t be surprising, but it seemed like this podcast was different than the rest of the magazine, dealing in actual facts rather than Friedmanite truisms about rent control policies which haven’t been implemented since the 1940s.

Lots of strange silent gaps in podcast which destroy the flow.

Has strayed too far to the left; even moderate conservative viewpoints are presented as those of far right fascists. The hosts are stuck in their bubble. Had to stop listening as the show lacks impartiality.

I typically look to the economist for fair, unbiased, and agenda-free content. This podcast use to be excellent at that. However, the new cohost makes her political agenda clear, which means it likely influences the editorial selections. I now consider this just another partisan news source.

I don’t know if intended but this podcast often has more in common with the leaders in the magazine (editorials) than news. An example is their podcast on May 1 about Columbia and the issues on college campuses. It was a very long editorial disguised as news. The podcast should have accurately distinguished between news and editorial. They accepted as a given that universities must negotiate with people who break university rules en masse, break into buildings, etc vs enforce their rules. There was also no mention of the fact that the students protesting at Columbia forced a shut down of in person classes and had a number of reported alleged incidents (even away from breaking into building) involving anti semitism or vandalism. It appears these omissions were made because they would not fit the editorial narrative of the podcast. I also note that a number of the things the commentator stated as fact in terms of how universities have addressed freedom of speech in other situations are disputed by many. I suggest the writers of the podcast read the reports of FIRE on free speech at colleges and universities. I also suggest they read the letter President Eisgruber at Princeton wrote to the student paper (The Daily Princetonian) or review the Chicago Principles set forth by the University of Chicago as a model of how a college or university might approach speech and protests on campus consistently. To quote Chicago President Alivisatos, the school will act to protect “even expressions of viewpoints that some find deeply offensive” but draws a line at actions “that block the learning or expression of others … [or] disrupts the functioning or safety of the University.” Another issue the podcast ignored is that to many colleges and universities are allowing speech vs Jews that would simply not be tolerated with regard to many other groups (whether defined by race, religion or ethnicity). From this perspective the problems faced by colleges and universities are in part the price for not enforcing rules equally. I hope this podcast is not a harbinger of the breakdown in objective news reporting by the Economist.

This is one of the best podcast. Nothing else fills my drive to work than this podcast. Thank you for all your the hard work. Jason is awesome and his voice fills my day. I miss John. Please bring back John. Together John and Jason brought maturity to the podcast which was awesome. Ore needs training. Her immaturity is killing the show. Please train Ore more and then she can try again. But do not spoil it any further. I tried to continue listening hoping that her voice and interview skill will improve over time but I could not any more. If Jason is not there I just could not continue. When Ore starts the show I shut it down. No offense though. Jason is awesome and it is for him I am continuing. One of the primary reason for not subscribing to podcast+ is Ore. Thank you.

Economist switched to a subscriber model. Ok, quality content, here’s my money. Now, advertisements everywhere, despite listening to “subscriber edition” podcasts. Feeling very duped. This is ridiculous.

Tormented indeed! My ears are still buzzing from the god awful sound effects the economist decided to use underneath the vocal track. Normally, I enjoy all of the stories the daily podcast offers. Today, not so much.

I agree with some of the other reviews…it’s less about the news and content and more about her and her need to sound interesting and oh so cool. Sorry, also very annoying voice for podcasting.

Your massive underreporting of numbers in the Gaza Strip is mind-boggling. Do better. Your stats are pathetically low-balled.

Shame on you for the lack of reporting on the annihilation happening in Palestine. The utter lack of coverage- no critical examination of a brutal occupation that’s culminated in a cruel siege that’s beyond brutal. Where do you live? You don’t see the images in your news feeds? I am deeply, deeply disappointed in the unethical conduct of turning a blind eye to the war crimes in Palestine. How amazing that the aggressor can genocide a people who don”t even have a standing army, and persist in calling themselves victims in part because they know western journalists will be their mouthpiece even when said journalists are silent.

I would give this show 5 stars if it were hosted only by Jason Palmer. The female host Ogunbiyi doesn’t seem to realize she’s not the news and I am perplexed by her inserting herself into the topic whenever possible. Todays show with that “you are welcome”? Seriously. Get yourself a talk show, girl, to be yourself.

Are used to like the Economist podcasts. However, in recent years, there has been a slow and steady decline in quality. Now it seems everything is driven by quantity versus quality. Nine out of 10 podcasts, I stop about 2 minute into them and delete them straight away because the topics are narrowly researched, the interviewees are uninteresting (usually with bad audio) and the whole construction of the podcast is of poor quality. Unfollowed and deleted.

Great mix of news coverage and interesting cultural bits. Loving the new Ore + Jason host duo and, obviously, all those Economist puns (including in the episode titles!). Your show makes me a better conversationalist. Keep up the great work, team!!

Weekend Intelligence is a master class in journalism. Bravo.

I get the attempted move to a subscription-based model. I’m sure you had some well-paid consultants make the case to you. Unfortunately you are a few years too late. People are sick of new subscriptions, with ever increasing costs — especially for things they are happy to listen to for free with paid advertisements. The move that led me to move to post a negative review, however, was the bait-and-switch story in the Thanksgiving/Black Friday episode — in which you began to tell the story of china and the Dalia llama, only to then abruptly cut it short to push YET ANOTHER a half-off your subscription offer. At this point who is going to believe the full-value price of your subscription? And at this point what high-value listeners haven’t already decided to sign up. A bait-and-switch ad presented as a story isn’t the way to get me to sign up. It’s the way to get my to dig in my feels and refuse to sign up.

I’m really disappointed in you, Intelligence team. How could you run an entire story on bungee jumping without even a single mention of its origin as a rite of passage for the ni-Vanuatu on Pentecost Island? You actually refer to that white man as “inventing” the sport. Shame on you.

Ore is ok but she’s not very easy to listen to and doesn’t bring much to the table. I wish they would just stick with Jason only. He has the best voice and his personality is the best

Their coverage of Israel's attacks on Gaza has been utterly one-sided. They've provided no history or context relating to the siege, oppression, and apartheid that Israel has subjected Palestinians to in the rgeion to for decades. They offer nothing but full-throated support for a corrupt and powerful government commiting ethnic cleansing in the name of yet another "War on Terror".

It's become clear that on certain issues, but most egregiously with Israel's genocidal campaign against Palestinians in Gaza (sorry, " the war on Hamas"), this podcast's coverage is grossly one sided.There's no such thing as truly objective journalis, but the schlock they've been rolling out since the start of the confilct has been unbearably reductive and very pro-Israeli. The "expert" they interview in the most recent episode about Gaza sparking a culture war, spews some drivel about the conflict being reduced to simple terms of Good vs Evil by Gen Z kids virtue signaling on the internt. He essentially says that it's only possible to have sympathy for one-side, and that one can get more internet brownie points for backing the powerless vs the powerful (humorously underscoring himself the laughable notion of referring to the David vs the Goliath situation a war). Ironic, given that The "Intelligence" has in no way offered a balanced view of the ongoing violence, or it's historical roots and context. Palestine = Hamas, Hamas = Bad. Holocaust = happened, therefore anything Israel does = Justified. I'm digusted to the point of unsubscribing. Hoped I could come back to the pod eventually, but seeing this crap in my feed is too infuriating.

The few episodes I’ve heard have been poorly researched. With a lack of appreciation for how statistics work.

I've enjoyed listening to the show the past few years. Sad to see it go behind a paywall. Can't imagine the advertisers will much appreciate it, either...

Jason Palmer is the best. His silky smooth voice and wit are what I look forward to each episode. I had a hard time getting used to Fassman, and am really not enjoying Ore’s voice. I wish you would stick with only Jason.

Completely predictable, derivative advocacy masquerading as journalism.

I really love this podcast and the hosts are excellent. Ore and Jason are solid, Jason on his own was great (and his wry humor good). I was take it or leave it on John, but hey the stories are what make this podcast work. I really like the three story format, so that even when I’m less interested in the lead there’s often a secondary piece that catches my interest. All in all, the Intelligence leaves me better informed.

Normally this is a great program for daily news you may not hear elsewhere. But for US politics and cultural matters they take the words of Democratic advocates and news sources, which are frequently half-true or untrue. For example, they ignore wide-scale left-wing violence in America, report on democratic attempts at police reform while ignoring the Democrats’ filibuster of similar Republican efforts led by Senator Tim Scott, and don’t look at basic statistics on matters like unarmed police shootings. It would be nice if the Economist used its international perspective to avoid partisan coverage. We Americans need more actually objective coverage! Update: the US coverage bias continues, taking the Democratic Party line that state election reforms are racist, and ignoring that what they are limiting are fraud-prone policies such as drive-through voting or 24-hour voting which had only just been added during the COVID pandemic, and that these laws actually make voting easier than it has been pre-pandemic. Dear Economist, please check your biases!

Can you please change the intro music from an annoying siren to something more pleasant? I find that it ruins my morning and I don’t need that sense of urgency and anxiety from a podcast.

This podcast was shorter. I listen at 2x speed and it’s still more time than I want to spend on a daily podcast. Please go back to being more digestible.

The content is crisp and informative and J. Palmer’s voice is cherry on the cake

How delightful to hear from Jon Fasman on today’s podcast. His deep and broad knowledge on so many subjects always makes me feel smarter when listening to him. Thanks.

I once again took a peek to see if this podcast righted the ship, hoping third time was a charm. Not at all. In fact, they have completely given themselves over to extreme right wing views. Constant coverage of extremist republicans who have literally accomplished nothing except spewing hate get lionizing coverage. No coverage of actual passed laws and policy debates. Every story is straight from the extremist playbook, couched in far right talking points and a Christian nationalist skewed view of the world. A clear example: the 1 year anniversary of the Dobbs decision. All the coverage from the anti-abortion point of view, using their language. All the sound bytes from that extremist minority. Said the absurd term “pro-life” over 7 times, a cheesy marketing term from the 1980s for extremists to hide behind. The issue is abortion, and it’s so it’s either pro or anti abortion, not pro-life or pro-choice. It has never been about life, and never will be, other then to try to control people’s lives using their extremist ideology and forcing their morally bankrupt religious beliefs on everyone else. But the extremist bent of the coverage becomes plain when you count the number of times “pro-choice”was used: 0. The number of sound bytes from the other side: 0. The amount of coverage: 0. The sad thing is the fig leaf that lazy journalists used to hide behind has completely fallen away, and yet you have 2 women saying pro-life over and over again when the story was about how these extremist don’t want to allow abortion even if the mothers life is in extreme danger (screw her life), and wanting to kill people who not only perform abortions, but are connected in any way at all. Even though polls have shown time and again that 60-70% of the country wants abortion to be available, and the rest are divided in their level of opposition, they give 100% of coverage to corrupt extremists that violate the Constitution at every turn. Journalist like this is why we are where we are today. The truly sad thing is it came from the mouths of 2 women, at least one a person of color. This is just the podcast version of Fox News, complete with replacing white males with women and Uncle Toms to try to add a veneer of respectability. You can’t hide behind a racist,sexist, and misogynistic style guide [written by a white male, of course] to cover the extremist bias in the reporting. They actually did a story on it where he didn’t even know his own style guide (guess he forgot what his rich Republican donors told him to say), completely ignoring that doing stories about yourself is another violation journalistic ethics. Cheesiness at every turn. This is the last time I will give them a try.

Please bring Jason Palmer back as full time host!

I have found this pod cast informative and well-presented.

This. Is. A. Good. Podcast. I. Hope. This. Podcast. Can. Stay. I. Like the information. On. This podcast. I. Understand. All. The. Information. On. This. Podcast. Brent. Allgire. Bellingham. Washington.

She’s a good interviewer and I enjoy listening to her (she has an excellent voice). I hope that she stays!

Very insightful and interesting. At 100, Mr. Kissinger speaks with experience and intelligence. An amazing mind.

On Monday’s episode the good the bad and the ugly the reporter said the first use of a mobile phone in a movie was 1977’s Wall Street. Wall Street was released in 1987.

Please bring back Jason Palmer as full-time host.

Ogunbiyi is the perfect match for Palmer. It also bring some diversity in terms of gender, race and generation. Brilliant move. Thank you!

Another one who thinks jason doesn’t need a co-host. I was impressed by the Kiera Bell case coverage

Am I the only one who likes Ore Ogunbiyi? I think her perspective is refreshing, and she has a strong but pleasant voice. To those saying Jason doesn’t need a co-host - it’s probably a business decision more than a creative one. This continues to be one of my favorite podcasts. I appreciate the Economist’s ambition to deliver impartial reporting, even if they don’t always nail it. As an American, I also really appreciate their global perspective.

I agree with other recent reviewers who think that Jason Palmer was doing a fantastic job and didn’t need a co-host. Plus, Jon Fasman was on The Intelligence for about 3 days (okay, maybe 6 months?) and now he’s gone and you’ve brought in someone new. Jon Fasman was much better on Checks

YOU DON’T NEED A CO HOST. if you have one, make them at least half as good as Jason

Great daily podcast, but the Obituaries add a tremendous extra dimension, learning about people that we may not hear enough about. Hopefully will keep sprinkling in obits to the podcast.

This has become my daily source of morning inspiration to think about what is happening in the broader world. Love the diverse topics and guests.