One thing I noticed about The Economist is that every so often they'll bring up some interesting criticism of a widely held view. Then a few days later they'll publish an article vigorously supporting the Current Thing. A particularly obvious example was when they had a column about Ukraine from John Mearshimer, and the various follow-ups. They also ran that takedown of Mohammed bin Salman but periodically tout the upsides of Saudi Arabia.

I don't hold it against them, really; it's a business, and modern journalism relies on maintaining relationships with sources, who are often government officials and agencies. It's not too hard to recognize the stuff that gets published "defensively" once you're used to that.