The highly-opinionated editorials section is one of the most popular sections. Although most people like the honesty and candidness, I think that Steve Forbes tends to come off like a know-it-all. He constantly proposes one-size-fits-all solutions. For example, he thinks that a strong dollar is a cure-all for the economy. He doesn't realize that the primary force that influences the US economy is the middle-class consumer. And he tends to propose solutions - like the flat tax - that will never happen. Although these issues are thought-provoking, they are also a distraction to the day-to-day routine of a trader or investor. Although I do think that the broader economic issues are an important factor to monitor as an investor, the smartest investors take a big-picture outlook when it comes to the economy, and don't waste their time drowning in minutia and constantly churning macro-economic issues. Most of the people who do waste their time are simply armchair economists who get baited by the media to give a voice to the "macro-economic talking heads".
To some people, Forbes has the reputation of being a stuffy, conservative magazine for old money types. I hesitate to write this because I don't want to get tied up in liberal-vs-conservative rhetoric. But I generally agree with this belief and I think that it shapes the content in a couple of meaningful ways.
First, they tend to write mostly about high-profile, blue-chip companies. These are not the kind of people who do bottom-up analysis and comb though data to try to find a nice small-cap stock. Their concentration on blue chips will be viewed as positive or negative by different people. Some people like reading about stocks that they are most likely to have positions in. Other investors will be tired of reading about companies that they already know a lot about - and companies whose stocks are most likely to be efficiently priced.
And second, they spend a disproportionate amount of time writing about the industries that are run by old, white men -…