Who can guarantee objectivity? No one. That doesn't mean it is not possible to pursue it or even gain a good measure of it. Do you really believe it makes the Economist look partisan to support Democrats since 2004? What about before that?
From 1996 - 2012 it was Dole, Bush, Kerry, Obama, Obama.
Isn't it possible to support certain ideals no matter which party they come from? The fact that their proposals do not always align with specific interest groups supports a claim of impartiality.
I agree with you that it is difficult, and perhaps impossible to measure or achieve objectivity, but that is what they claim to have already done.
In addition, it is somewhat absurd to pretend that a magazine takes a position, when it is really the editorial board that makes all the decisions. If one wants to examine any potential biases, one should examine the record of each editor or columnist, not the entire 100+ year history of a collection of their works.
I also agree with you that they may not have any source-based bias, but their claims are much broader:
>The Economist has no permanent address on the left-right scale.
From 1996 - 2012 it was Dole, Bush, Kerry, Obama, Obama.
http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2012/11/us...
Isn't it possible to support certain ideals no matter which party they come from? The fact that their proposals do not always align with specific interest groups supports a claim of impartiality.