Without delving into the specifics of Scientology, I am reminded of a grellas quotation: "The most valuable asset of a lawyer is his reputation." This applies to some journalistic endeavors as well. In some cases, I seek out the thoughts of those whose facts are unreliable, because their opinions are interesting or novel. But just as often, I seek out long-form, descriptive pieces to learn what reliable people believ…
Indeed ... and once lost, trust is very hard to regain. I subscribed to the Economist through most of the '90s, but did not renew my subscription following a rather blithe editorial saying Bill Clinton should resign. I still have a measure of respect for them on non-controversial topics—they're very good at explaining technical details in a simple way, for instance—but my faith in their judgment is gone.
That's the reason I almost never read their leaders. I also tried to forgive them for the financial derivatives-special issue they had around 2007 or so, just before the shit started hitting the fan, but they were at least trying to counter-balance that with regular (small) articles in the financial section about the housing boom.
Otherwise their world-news reporting I think it's the best out-there.
